Re: libraries missing on F22 and higher

[Antonio Trande]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 12/27/2015 09:04 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 01:48:23AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 12/27/2015 01:11 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
>> 
 Also, RPMFusion respects Fedora packaging guidelines or not?
>>> 
>>> yes we do
>> 
>> Aparently RPMFusion does not repect the FPG. Packages complying
>> to the FPG are supposed to have been rebuilt for f23 and
>> therefore to carry a package suffix of ".f23".
> 
> Not really. There are often mass rebuild during Fedora
> development, caused by various reasons: new GCC, change of default
> compiler flags, hardening etc.  But mass rebuild is not required
> for every Fedora release.
> 

At last someone comprehends what I meant.
Beyond .fc suffix (that could create confusion during Fedora upgrade
however), here you're saying that RPMFusion packages must not be
audited periodically, even for months, it's enough they work.

I ask again, how can we know if a package .fc(x) compiles/works fine
on Fedora(x+n) without a rebuild?

- -- 
Antonio Trande

mailto: sagitter 'at' fedoraproject 'dot' org
http://fedoraos.wordpress.com/
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter
GPG Key: 0x565E653C
Check on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWf8KsAAoJEF5tK7VWXmU8RLcH/igoXg+afHUXBY4SJVwL7VN5
6NIh73qWm63TnMOqeUh4lsVEEety1WoiYfyirDRD05H08SGZCfdv5/1hK4wsX0XP
a19Ul1ZAdcxOnwPDlYgHMh27x2k6NYFCcRdyqaKavU4eUiJXjeLSpdREavy01cs2
axa1V7haS5CrWojDDkXiJgCAIwKzOS1OWuJxhM2y3gfZojJDJ4yhXAPoh9ECR3wc
d8Jyxd7IpYT6R6GpkJg/xyJbIwb3AMPv2jPQuMLtFRPpG/geU9zwh9bLf0HPSlY+
wTLMFN1fxnJyKcB/q53ZNVNhakxTwwGr1Xr39+E9kMUyhbZhwNbK3KU2DMQ4gqw=
=etVC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[Bug 3863] Review request: game-data-packager - Installer for game data files

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3863

Hans de Goede  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||j.w.r.dego...@gmail.com
 Blocks|2   |3
 AssignedTo|rpmfusion-package-review@rp |j.w.r.dego...@gmail.com
   |mfusion.org |

--- Comment #3 from Hans de Goede  2015-12-27 13:07:17 
CET ---
Hi,

Sorry for being slow in reviewing this. It has been a bit busy lately, but I've
time now.

Overall the spec file looks good, a few remarks:

1) You mix Recommends and Suggests, according to:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/WeakDependencies

Suggests are pretty much ignored under Fedora atm. So you may want to change
most Suggests into Recommends, at least for those Suggests which are available
as Fedora packages in the standard Fedora repos.

2) The %install section is quite long, you say that you've added a "make
install" target upstream, it would be good to use this in the next version

3) The "%clean" section is obsolete, and also it is not intended to do a "make
clean" but to remove the $RPM_BUILD_ROOT aka the "make install" DESTDIR.

4) I see no license files in the %files sections. I guess since this comes from
Debian that it relies on the shared versions of the GPL text used in Debian, in
Fedora we ship a single license file per package, it would be good if you could
add the GPLv2 txt to the upstream tarbal (typically called COPYING) and add a 
"%license COPYING" to the file-list for both the main and the
doom2-masterlevels packages.

Regards,

Hans

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.

Re: libraries missing on F22 and higher

[Tomasz Torcz]

On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 01:48:23AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 12/27/2015 01:11 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> 
> >>Also, RPMFusion respects Fedora packaging guidelines or not?
> >
> >yes we do
> 
> Aparently RPMFusion does not repect the FPG. Packages complying to the FPG
> are supposed to have been rebuilt for f23 and therefore to carry a package
> suffix of ".f23".

  Not really. There are often mass rebuild during Fedora development,
caused by various reasons: new GCC, change of default compiler flags,
hardening etc.  But mass rebuild is not required for every Fedora release.

-- 
Tomasz Torcz "God, root, what's the difference?"
xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl "God is more forgiving."

[Bug 3912] Review request: lives - Video editor and VJ tool

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3912

Antonio Trande  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks|2   |3

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 3912] Review request: lives - Video editor and VJ tool

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3912

--- Comment #21 from Antonio Trande  2015-12-27 18:22:22 
CET ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> I've build Lives from the last src.rpm posted here and installed it on a
> machine running an up to date Fedora 23/64bit. Imported a youtube-clip and
> everything went fine. The clip was imported properly (showing as webm-video)
> and there were no crashes at all. 
> 
> "Downloading https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdSqPPRPI1o to
> /home/gerhard/Videos/.webm...Opening /home/gerhard/Videos/.webm using LiVES 
> mkv
> decoder version 1.2
> Frames=7455 type=mkv/vp8/unknown size=480x360 bpp=32 fps=25.000
> Audio: 44100 Hz 2 channels 16 bps"
> 
> PS: A big, big thank you to the developer of Lives and also to the packager. 
> It
> would be great to see this fine videoeditor in rpmfusion.

Can you select Tools-->Preference without crash? If yes, which DE (Gnome, XFce,
KDE) are you using?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Re: libraries missing on F22 and higher

[Sérgio Basto]

On Dom, 2015-12-27 at 11:51 +0100, Antonio Trande wrote:
> On 12/27/2015 09:04 AM, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 01:48:23AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > On 12/27/2015 01:11 AM, Sérgio Basto wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > Also, RPMFusion respects Fedora packaging guidelines or not?
> > > > 
> > > > yes we do
> > > 
> > > Aparently RPMFusion does not repect the FPG. Packages complying
> > > to the FPG are supposed to have been rebuilt for f23 and
> > > therefore to carry a package suffix of ".f23".
> > 
> > Not really. There are often mass rebuild during Fedora
> > development, caused by various reasons: new GCC, change of default
> > compiler flags, hardening etc.  But mass rebuild is not required
> > for every Fedora release.
> > 
> 
> At last someone comprehends what I meant.
> Beyond .fc suffix (that could create confusion during Fedora upgrade
> however), here you're saying that RPMFusion packages must not be
> audited periodically, even for months, it's enough they work.
> 
> I ask again, how can we know if a package .fc(x) compiles/works fine
> on Fedora(x+n) without a rebuild?

Is the power of RPM , if fulfill all requires of package it works (rpm
-q --requires package) 

For example Mosaic-2.7-0.3.b5.fc11.x86_64 still works on Fedora 23 ,
but is a FTBFS since F12 or 13 . So fail to build is not equivalent to
fail to run .

-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[Bug 3912] Review request: lives - Video editor and VJ tool

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3912

--- Comment #22 from GerhardK  2015-12-28 01:21:45 CET 
---
I'm using Xfce and no, I can't open "Tools - Preferences", it is followed by an
immediate crash of Lives:

#0  0x7fed93c375db in waitpid () at /lib64/libpthread.so.0
#1  0x7fed96adb9a3 in g_on_error_stack_trace () at /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0
#2  0x56501bbb6a3a in catch_sigint ()
#3  0x7fed93c379f0 in  () at /lib64/libpthread.so.0
#4  0x7fed96e29703 in g_type_check_is_value_type ()
#5  0x7fed9877d9a5 in _gtk_tree_data_list_check_type ()
#6  0x7fed986787c1 in gtk_list_store_newv () at /lib64/libgtk-3.so.0
#7  0x56501bbb03ff in lives_list_store_new ()
#8  0x56501bc34560 in create_prefs_dialog ()
#9  0x56501bc3e436 in on_preferences_activate ()
#10 0x7fed96e047a5 in g_closure_invoke () at /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
#11 0x7fed96e16851 in signal_emit_unlocked_R ()
#12 0x7fed96e1f530 in g_signal_emit_valist () at /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
#13 0x7fed96e1f8ff in g_signal_emit () at /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
#14 0x7fed987bdace in gtk_widget_activate () at /lib64/libgtk-3.so.0
#15 0x7fed9869b576 in gtk_menu_shell_activate_item ()
#16 0x7fed9869b8a4 in gtk_menu_shell_button_release ()
#17 0x7fed9867e03a in _gtk_marshal_BOOLEAN__BOXEDv ()
#18 0x7fed96e049d4 in _g_closure_invoke_va () at /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
#19 0x7fed96e1edd3 in g_signal_emit_valist () at /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
#20 0x7fed96e1f8ff in g_signal_emit () at /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0
#21 0x7fed987bb63c in gtk_widget_event_internal () at /lib64/libgtk-3.so.0
#22 0x7fed9867b3ae in propagate_event () at /lib64/libgtk-3.so.0
#23 0x7fed9867d15c in gtk_main_do_event () at /lib64/libgtk-3.so.0
#24 0x7fed981f5a42 in gdk_event_source_dispatch () at /lib64/libgdk-3.so.0
#25 0x7fed96b05e3a in g_main_context_dispatch () at /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0
#26 0x7fed96b061d0 in g_main_context_iterate.isra ()
#27 0x7fed96b064f2 in g_main_loop_run () at /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0
#28 0x7fed9867c385 in gtk_main () at /lib64/libgtk-3.so.0
#29 0x56501bbbdcdc in real_main ()
#30 0x7fed93886580 in __libc_start_main () at /lib64/libc.so.6
#31 0x56501bbac7f9 in _start ()

It's exactly identical to what's been already mentioned and posted on
sourceforge: http://sourceforge.net/p/lives/bugs/210/

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug 3912] Review request: lives - Video editor and VJ tool

[RPM Fusion Bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3912

--- Comment #23 from salsaman  2015-12-28 02:49:55 CET ---
OK, let's try to debug this. Please try these things in sequence:

edit preferences.c, and find the line:

store = lives_list_store_new(N_COLUMNS, LIVES_COL_TYPE_PIXBUF,
LIVES_COL_TYPE_STRING, LIVES_COL_TYPE_UINT);

replace this with (recompile and test each time):

1) store = gtk_list_store_new(N_COLUMNS, LIVES_COL_TYPE_PIXBUF,
LIVES_COL_TYPE_STRING, LIVES_COL_TYPE_UINT);

2) store = gtk_list_store_new(3, GDK_TYPE_PIXBUF, G_TYPE_STRING, G_TYPE_UINT);


3) store = gtk_list_store_new(3, G_TYPE_INT, G_TYPE_INT, G_TYPE_INT);

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.