[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-30 03:14 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) I honestly don't know what the proper solution is. Many packages own those directories, but I guess it might also be reasonable to depend on hicolor-icon-theme. Done. Updated bits here: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~green/FE/FC5/zynaddsubfx.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~green/FE/FC5/zynaddsubfx-2.2.1-8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-30 01:30 EST --- Somehow I managed to miss your reply. Sorry about that; too much bugzilla mail, I guess. About the unowned directory: here is the set of packages in FC5 (core+extras) which own /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps: HelixPlayer-1:1.0.6-1.2.2.i386 hicolor-icon-theme-0:0.9-2.noarch sound-juicer-0:2.14.4-1.fc5.1.i386 gdm-1:2.14.9-1.i386 fedora-logos-0:1.1.42-1.fc5.1.noarch k3b-0:0.12.15-0.FC5.1.i386 openoffice.org-core-1:2.0.2-5.17.2.i386 rssowl-0:1.2.1-1.fc5.i386 pikdev-0:0.9.1-1.fc5.i386 banshee-0:0.10.8-1.i386 rssowl-0:1.2.1-2.fc5.i386 banshee-0:0.10.9-1..fc5.i386 koffice-core-0:1.5.1-1.fc5.i386 taskjuggler-0:2.2.0-1.fc5.i386 kdirstat-0:2.5.3-3.fc5.i386 amarok-0:1.4.1-2.fc5.i386 amarok-0:1.4.1-3.fc5.i386 koffice-core-0:1.5.2-1.fc5.i386 pikdev-0:0.9.1-2.fc5.i386 sound-juicer-0:2.14.4-1.fc5.1.i386 fedora-logos-0:1.1.42-1.fc5.1.noarch gdm-1:2.14.9-1.i386 k3b-0:0.12.15-0.FC5.1.i386 openoffice.org-core-1:2.0.2-5.16.2.i386 openoffice.org-core-1:2.0.2-5.17.2.i386 Does this package depend, directly or indirectly, on any of those? It doesn't look like it to me. And thus you could install this package and its dependencies and /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps would be unowned, and that's problematic according to the guidelines. I honestly don't know what the proper solution is. Many packages own those directories, but I guess it might also be reasonable to depend on hicolor-icon-theme. Everything else looks good. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-26 23:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) Cool, looks good now and builds fine; rpmlint is silent. Sorry for the long delay. I've cleaned up everything you mentioned, with one exception: I'm not sure that anything you depend on owns /usr/share/icons or the directories under it. (At least in FC5.) Is this really a problem? If so, why? And what should I do about it? Thanks! Updated bits here: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~green/FE/FC5/zynaddsubfx.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~green/FE/FC5/zynaddsubfx-2.2.1-7.src.rpm AG -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO_REPORTER -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-21 02:53 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) Looks like there's the dreaded rpath problem: E: zynaddsubfx binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/controller ['/usr/lib64'] E: zynaddsubfx binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/zynaddsubfx ['/usr/lib64'] E: zynaddsubfx binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/spliter ['/usr/lib64'] Unfortunately I can't figure out where it's coming from. This was a bug in fltk-config --ldflags output. Also, the recommended Fedora compilation flags don't seem to be used at all; everything seems to be compiled with -O6. Fixed. I found a fltk-config --cflags output as well. Two bugs were filed against fltk. Updated bits here: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~green/FE/FC5/zynaddsubfx.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~green/FE/FC5/zynaddsubfx-2.2.1-6.src.rpm Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-22 00:58 EST ---
Cool, looks good now and builds fine; rpmlint is silent.
I note that you don't use a dist tag. It's not an absolute requirement but it
does simplify your maintenance overhead a bit because it allows you to use the
same spec for multiple distro releases. I just want to make sure you intended
to leave it out.
The %description leaves a bit to be desired in the grammar department, which is
understandable given that the author is not a native speaker. Plus that you'll
boost to an amazing universe of sounds does put a smile on my face. I'm not
really sure what to suggest; how about just:
ZynAddSubFX is an open source software synthesizer capable of making a
countless number of instrument sounds.
or somesuch.
I'm not sure that anything you depend on owns /usr/share/icons or the
directories under it. (At least in FC5.)
Your scriptlets are slightly different from those in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets:
You don't call touch with --no-create; you don't use ||: on the touch line,
and you use /usr/bin instead of %{_bindir}.
I'm not sure what difference the first two make in practise. The latter is a
stylistic issue; the macro is generally preferred over hardcoded paths, but the
suggested scriptlets are not consistent in this.
Review:
* source files match upstream:
fca8560e37d799bd20d17e22b11674d6 ZynAddSubFX-2.2.1.tar.bz2
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
X dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible. License text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* Compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
zynaddsubfx = 2.2.1-6
=
/bin/sh
desktop-file-utils
fltk = 1.1.3
jack-audio-connection-kit = 0.101.1
libX11.so.6()(64bit)
libXext.so.6()(64bit)
libXft.so.2()(64bit)
libXrender.so.1()(64bit)
libasound.so.2()(64bit)
libasound.so.2(ALSA_0.9)(64bit)
libfftw3.so.3()(64bit)
libfltk.so.1.1()(64bit)
libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
libjack.so.0()(64bit)
liblash.so.2()(64bit)
libmxml.so.1()(64bit)
libuuid.so.1()(64bit)
libz.so.1()(64bit)
mxml = 2.2
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
X owns the directories it creates. (/usr/share/icons)
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
? scriptlets present; differ from the suggested ones.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* GUI app; desktop file installed properly. No MIME types defined, so no need
to update the desktop database.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-20 20:36 EST --- Looks like there's the dreaded rpath problem: E: zynaddsubfx binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/controller ['/usr/lib64'] E: zynaddsubfx binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/zynaddsubfx ['/usr/lib64'] E: zynaddsubfx binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/spliter ['/usr/lib64'] Unfortunately I can't figure out where it's coming from. Also, the recommended Fedora compilation flags don't seem to be used at all; everything seems to be compiled with -O6. Unless I'm missing the flags that are coming out of the various -config programs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-20 21:13 EST --- Thanks. I had a quick look and I can fix these tonight. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 199021] Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zynaddsubfx - Real-time software synthesizer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199021 Bug 199021 depends on bug 199016, which changed state. Bug 199016 Summary: Review Request: mxml - Miniature XML development library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199016 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
