[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 Sérgio Basto changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Blocks|2 | Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #32 from Sérgio Basto 2016-08-15 00:14:05 CEST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 4186 *** -- 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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 Sérgio Basto changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Blocks||2 Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #31 from Sérgio Basto 2015-10-29 04:21:33 CET --- SPEC: http://www.serjux.com/rpms/scid.spec SRPM: http://www.serjux.com/rpms/scid-4.6.2-1.fc21.src.rpm I will be able to add this package , the scid.spec is the same made by Mikhail Kalenkov , I just update it to 4.6.2 -- 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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 Richard changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hobbes1...@gmail.com Blocks|2, 30 | Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #30 from Richard 2011-09-29 20:37:05 --- There's been no activity on this review request for >1 year and will be closed. Please reopen if you are still interested in pursuing it. Remember to re-add the review tracker bug (#2), and the sponsorship bug (#30) if needed, if you decide to reopen it. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #29 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-10-12 12:51:22 --- (In reply to comment #28) > Well, It seems that I don't match the standards of the rpmfusion contributor. I don't think this is true. You seem to well match standard of fedora and rpmfusion contributor. > Surprisingly sponsorship procedure turns out to be very boring. I could not > make a review of the packages which are completely uninteresting to me. Bad that procedure stuck at sponsoring step. Everything else looks fine for me: fine spec and interested to maintain packager. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #28 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-10-12 10:34:54 --- (In reply to comment #27) > ping, any progress here? > Well, It seems that I don't match the standards of the rpmfusion contributor. Surprisingly sponsorship procedure turns out to be very boring. I could not make a review of the packages which are completely uninteresting to me. Sorry. If someone wants to push scid (and related stuff) into rpmfusion, I'm happy to assist. SRPMS of the packages can be find here http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fedora/11/SRPMS/ I would like to thank Orcan Ogetbil and Alexey Torkhov for their contribution. Their suggestions and comments substantially improved package quality. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #27 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-10-09 00:47:55 --- ping, any progress here? -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #26 from Orcan Ogetbil 2009-06-20 19:25:45 --- Thanks, I think the package is good now, but you need to be sponsored. Fedora has a procedure for those who want to get sponsored. This applies to RPMFusion as well. See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Basically, you have to show that you are capable and have sufficient knowledge of Fedora packaging guidelines. This can be done in at least two ways: Submitting another package that is in good condition for review or doing unofficial reviews on other existing review requests (bug #2). Later on, when you are sponsored, you can turn your unofficial reviews into official. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
--- Comment #25 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-06-20
14:43:23 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
SPEC - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid.spec
SRPM - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid-3.7.3-9.fc11.src.rpm
> * Please explain in the SPEC file where
>Source3:%{name}.svg
> come from
I have rebuilt scid with upstream SVG icon. Currently I package icon as
separate source file (%{SOURCE2}). With the next scid release I will replace
%{SOURCE2} by the path to SVG icon in scid tarball.
file-not-utf8, wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding and egtb patches was accepted by
upstream (by not yet applied).
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #24 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-06-18 09:43:06 --- (In reply to comment #23) SPEC - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid.spec SRPM - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid-3.7.3-8.fc11.src.rpm > (In reply to comment #22) > > Done. I found that src/tcl/contrib/ezsmtp/* files have a nonGPL license > > (tcl/contrib/ezsmtp/license.txt). I wrote in spec file that they are "freely > > distributable". Is it correct? > > > > No, that is a BSD style license which is *compatible* with GPL [1]. That code > ends up in the final scid executable. GPL is stricter than BSD and the > stricter > license wins [2]. The scid authors decided to link this BSD code to GPL code > and they have the right to do so because of the GPL-compatibility. The > resulting file will be GPL. Well, GPLv2+ in this case. > > > [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses > [2] > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#How_should_I_handle_multiple_licensing_situations.3F > Thanks for the clarification. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #23 from Orcan Ogetbil 2009-06-18 09:20:42 --- (In reply to comment #22) > Done. I found that src/tcl/contrib/ezsmtp/* files have a nonGPL license > (tcl/contrib/ezsmtp/license.txt). I wrote in spec file that they are "freely > distributable". Is it correct? > No, that is a BSD style license which is *compatible* with GPL [1]. That code ends up in the final scid executable. GPL is stricter than BSD and the stricter license wins [2]. The scid authors decided to link this BSD code to GPL code and they have the right to do so because of the GPL-compatibility. The resulting file will be GPL. Well, GPLv2+ in this case. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#How_should_I_handle_multiple_licensing_situations.3F -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #22 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-06-18 07:40:53 --- (In reply to comment #21) SPEC - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid.spec SRPM - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid-3.7.3-7.fc11.src.rpm > (In reply to comment #18) > > I wrote two patches scid-makefile-togaII.patch and > > scid-makefile-phalanx.patch. Actually I don't like the way I fix optflags > > issues. Could you recommend a better way? > > > > I think this is the best we could do. You could ask upstream why they are not > honoring the flags defined by OPTIMIZE variable for the compilation of these > files. OK. > > Is it necessary to specify license tag for subpackages? > > > > Actually, this is a good question and something that I missed during the > review. The license tag is inherited from the parent package. You only have to > define the license tag in a subpackage if it is different from the parent's. > > Now, correct me if I'm wrong: In this case, > - the main package is "GPLv2+ and distributable only in Scid" > - sounds and bases packages are "GPLv2+" > - books package is "GPL+ and freely distributable" Done. I found that src/tcl/contrib/ezsmtp/* files have a nonGPL license (tcl/contrib/ezsmtp/license.txt). I wrote in spec file that they are "freely distributable". Is it correct? -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #21 from Orcan Ogetbil 2009-06-17 22:01:20 --- (In reply to comment #18) > I wrote two patches scid-makefile-togaII.patch and > scid-makefile-phalanx.patch. Actually I don't like the way I fix optflags > issues. Could you recommend a better way? > I think this is the best we could do. You could ask upstream why they are not honoring the flags defined by OPTIMIZE variable for the compilation of these files. > > * Also please include the doc files in src/egtb/ in %doc > Is it really necessary? These files are useful only for developers. > I think that you are right. These are the only documentation regarding Nalimov's code but they are not meant to be useful by end users. I leave the inclusion of these documents up to you. > > > * The final license tag will then be something like > >License: GPLv2+ and freely redistributable and distributable only in Scid > > Also please explain briefly with comments next to the license tag what files > > belong to each group. > Is it necessary to specify license tag for subpackages? > Actually, this is a good question and something that I missed during the review. The license tag is inherited from the parent package. You only have to define the license tag in a subpackage if it is different from the parent's. Now, correct me if I'm wrong: In this case, - the main package is "GPLv2+ and distributable only in Scid" - sounds and bases packages are "GPLv2+" - books package is "GPL+ and freely distributable" Please verify the GPL versions above and update the license tags accordingly. (In reply to comment #20) > > * There are a few compilation warnings of type > >src/egtb/tbindex.cpp:1204: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but > > argument 2 has type 'size_t' > > Please fix them as they might cause problems in 64bit systems. (Replacing > > %d by %zd should solve it) > Done. (I managed to reproduce it only on 64bit machine.) > Thanks! This patch is upstreamable. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #20 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-06-17 14:40:52 --- (In reply to comment #17) SPEC - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid.spec SRPM - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid-3.7.3-6.fc11.src.rpm > * There are a few compilation warnings of type >src/egtb/tbindex.cpp:1204: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but > argument 2 has type 'size_t' > Please fix them as they might cause problems in 64bit systems. (Replacing %d > by > %zd should solve it) Done. (I managed to reproduce it only on 64bit machine.) -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
--- Comment #19 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-06-17
13:19:42 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
Sorry, I forgot to reply to your question.
> ? Why are
>%dir %{_datadir}/%{name}/books
>%dir %{_datadir}/%{name}/bases
> owned by the main package but not by their respective subpackages? (In
> contrast, the
>%{_datadir}/%{name}/sounds/
> directory is owned by the subpackage.)
I did it intentionally. I thought that third party packages may keep their
files in books and bases directories. The same applies for
%{_datadir}/%{name}/photos directory. This directory is empty, because chess
player photos are not distributed with scid tarball, but I built several
packages with historic and contemporary players which keep their files in
%{_datadir}/%{name}/photos directory.
sounds directory couldn't extended in the same manner because scid hasn't such
functionality.
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
--- Comment #18 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-06-17
09:08:07 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
SPEC - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid.spec
SRPM - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid-3.7.3-4.fc11.src.rpm
> Thanks for the update. Here is the rest of the package review:
> ? What is this line for:
>iconv -f cp1251 -t utf8 tcl/lang/russian.tcl -o tcl/lang/russian.tcl.utf8
> &&
> mv -f tcl/lang/russian.tcl.utf8 tcl/lang/russian.tcl
> You didn't package this. Something missing?
tcl/lang/*.tcl files are building blocks of the /usr/bin/scid tcl script. I
convert russian.tcl into utf8 encoding, because otherwise scid doesn't show
Cyrillic letters in menu items.
> * Fedora specific optflags are not used for all compilations. From the
> build.log:
>g++ -pipe -Wall -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -O3 -fstrict-aliasing
> -fomit-frame-pointer -c -o eval.o eval.cpp
>gcc -O3 -Wall -fomit-frame-pointer --std=gnu89 -D_GNU_SOURCE -DGNUFUN -c
> killers.c -o .o/killers.o
> This needs attention. Do a
>rpm -E %{optflags}
> to see what flags need to be passed. Remember that these flags should not be
> overriden.
fixed. I wrote two patches scid-makefile-togaII.patch and
scid-makefile-phalanx.patch. Actually I don't like the way I fix optflags
issues. Could you recommend a better way?
> * There are a few compilation warnings of type
>src/egtb/tbindex.cpp:1204: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
> argument 2 has type 'size_t'
> Please fix them as they might cause problems in 64bit systems. (Replacing %d
> by
> %zd should solve it) Don't forget to send the patch upstream and provide a
> link
> from their tracker.
There is no such warnings during compilation on my i386 box.
http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/build-scid.log
> * Please explain in the SPEC file where
>Source2:%{name}.png
Deleted
>Source3:%{name}.svg
I created scid.svg myself. Actually I will drop it with next scid release
because current scid cvs tree contains better svg icon.
> Also you could try to upstream them along with
>Source1:%{name}.desktop
Ok, I'll try.
> * It appears to me that the help/ directory is worth putting in %doc
I guess it is not necessary because help/*.html files are building blocks of
the /usr/bin/scid tcl script and can be accessed from the scid application
(help menu item).
> * Also please include the doc files in src/egtb/ in %doc
Is it really necessary? These files are useful only for developers.
> ? What is all that stuff it the pocket/ directory? Don't we want them?
pocket/ directory contains scid source code adopted for Pocket PC.
> * The final license tag will then be something like
>License: GPLv2+ and freely redistributable and distributable only in Scid
> Also please explain briefly with comments next to the license tag what files
> belong to each group.
Is it necessary to specify license tag for subpackages?
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
--- Comment #17 from Orcan Ogetbil 2009-06-15 06:26:58
---
Thanks for the update. Here is the rest of the package review:
* Please remove the Authors section from %description. It is not our custom to
put this information in %description.
* %package -n %{name}-sounds
%description -n %{name}-sounds
%files -n %{name}-sounds
can be simplified to
%package sounds
%description sounds
%files sounds
Similarly for other subpackages.
* The .desktop file carries the Mimetype key. We need to use the scriptlets
from
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database
? Why are
%dir %{_datadir}/%{name}/books
%dir %{_datadir}/%{name}/bases
owned by the main package but not by their respective subpackages? (In
contrast, the
%{_datadir}/%{name}/sounds/
directory is owned by the subpackage.)
* The commented out section (lines 124-138) can be removed. Beware though, when
you want to use macros in comments and in the changelog, you need to escape
them with an extra %
! The line
%doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{name}-%{version}
can be replaced by
%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/
Note that you don't need to put an extra %doc when you use %{_docdir}
! Also, I recommend indicating directories in %files sections with a trailing /
For instance
%{_datadir}/%{name}/data/
? What is this line for:
iconv -f cp1251 -t utf8 tcl/lang/russian.tcl -o tcl/lang/russian.tcl.utf8 &&
mv -f tcl/lang/russian.tcl.utf8 tcl/lang/russian.tcl
You didn't package this. Something missing?
* Fedora specific optflags are not used for all compilations. From the
build.log:
g++ -pipe -Wall -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -O3 -fstrict-aliasing
-fomit-frame-pointer -c -o eval.o eval.cpp
gcc -O3 -Wall -fomit-frame-pointer --std=gnu89 -D_GNU_SOURCE -DGNUFUN -c
killers.c -o .o/killers.o
This needs attention. Do a
rpm -E %{optflags}
to see what flags need to be passed. Remember that these flags should not be
overriden.
* There are a few compilation warnings of type
src/egtb/tbindex.cpp:1204: warning: format '%d' expects type 'int', but
argument 2 has type 'size_t'
Please fix them as they might cause problems in 64bit systems. (Replacing %d by
%zd should solve it) Don't forget to send the patch upstream and provide a link
from their tracker.
* Please explain in the SPEC file where
Source2:%{name}.png
Source3:%{name}.svg
come from. Also you could try to upstream them along with
Source1:%{name}.desktop
I just realized that you don't use Source2 anywhere. Did you miss something?
* It appears to me that the help/ directory is worth putting in %doc
* Also please include the doc files in src/egtb/ in %doc
? What is all that stuff it the pocket/ directory? Don't we want them?
! Please remove the directory
src/zlib
in %prep to make sure we are not using it.
* %global is preferred over %define according to the new guidelines.
* TCL packaging guidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl
tell us that we must use
Requires: tcl(abi) = 8.5
to indicate which Tcl version they were built against.
? You define these
%{!?tcl_sitearch: %define tcl_sitearch %{_libdir}/tcl%{tcl_version}}
%{!?tcl_sitelib: %define tcl_sitelib %{_datadir}/tcl%{tcl_version}}
but you don't use them at all. I am a little confused here. TCL guidelines tell
us to use %{tcl_sitelib} as datadir, but you use SHAREDIR=%{_datadir}/%{name}
in the SPEC file. Is this what you are supposed to do? If yes, can't we remove
the above two lines from the SPEC file?
Now about the license:
* You say in comment #6 that scid/books/Performance.bin and
scid/books/varied.bin are freely redistributable. (they are otherwise non-free
because they are not modifiable, are they?)
We need to indicate this in the license tag by adding "freely redistributable".
* Nalimov's code is distributable only in Scid, so we need to add something
like "distributable only in Scid" to the license tag.
* The final license tag will then be something like
License: GPLv2+ and freely redistributable and distributable only in Scid
Also please explain briefly with comments next to the license tag what files
belong to each group.
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
--- Comment #16 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-06-09
20:20:05 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
Done.
SPEC: http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid.spec
SRPM: http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid-3.7.3-3.fc10.src.rpm
In spec file I fix several file-not-utf8 and wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
issues. I will try to fix it upstream.
> (In reply to comment #14)
> > (In reply to comment #12)
> > Thank you for the review. I am very sorry for the delay in the answer. I was
> > really very busy.
> >
>
> Thanks for the update. I'll try to answer your questions:
>
> > > ! Please make the %description span 80 columns.
> > ??? The length of the longest line in description is 70 chars.
> >
>
> Yes, and that's the very issue. It wouldn't look nice if you restrict the
> %description to, say, 30 columns. Would it? So we use 80 columns standard in
> Fedora and it is good to have consistency between our packages.
>
> >
> > > * All relevant doc files should be packaged. There are many documentation
> > > files scattered around the tarball. Can you go through them and include
> > > the relevant ones in %doc ?
> > What docs did you mean? It is not necessary to include scid/html/*.html
> > files because they are included into /usr/bin/scid file.
> >
>
> Please run
> $ find . -exec file {} \;|grep ASCII|grep -v -e program -e Makefile -e tcl:
> in the root of the source tree. You will see very many documentation files.
>
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
--- Comment #15 from Orcan Ogetbil 2009-06-09 01:10:35
---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> Thank you for the review. I am very sorry for the delay in the answer. I was
> really very busy.
>
Thanks for the update. I'll try to answer your questions:
> > ! Please make the %description span 80 columns.
> ??? The length of the longest line in description is 70 chars.
>
Yes, and that's the very issue. It wouldn't look nice if you restrict the
%description to, say, 30 columns. Would it? So we use 80 columns standard in
Fedora and it is good to have consistency between our packages.
>
> > * All relevant doc files should be packaged. There are many documentation
> > files scattered around the tarball. Can you go through them and include
> > the relevant ones in %doc ?
> What docs did you mean? It is not necessary to include scid/html/*.html
> files because they are included into /usr/bin/scid file.
>
Please run
$ find . -exec file {} \;|grep ASCII|grep -v -e program -e Makefile -e tcl:
in the root of the source tree. You will see very many documentation files.
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
--- Comment #14 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-06-08
13:14:19 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Thank you for the review. I am very sorry for the delay in the answer. I was
really very busy.
SPEC: http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid.spec
SRPM: http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid-3.7.3-2.fc10.src.rpm
>scid-books.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> books/readme.txt should be included as a %doc to this subpackage.
done
> * Patches should be explained (as comments in the SPEC file), and, if they are
> not Fedora specific, should be submitted upstream and the corresponding bug
> tracker links should be provided.
Patches are very short and very simple. I wrote short description in spec file.
Patches change some default paths and permissions. It is useless to submit
corresponding bugs upstream, because it can be regarded as Fedora specific
(paths) or discussed several times in scid mailing list (permissions).
> * About the patches:
>scid-makefile-engines.patch
> - Please use the -p switch for "install" command to preserve
> timestamps.
> In general, we want to conserve the timestamps of all non-compiled
> files.
> - You said bases/* is excluded by purpose, and upstream was working on
> them. Any updates on this latest release (3.7.1)?
Done. I packaged bases as a separate package, but actually scid cann't work
with this read only bases fluently.
>scid-makefile-phalanx.patch
> - We don't want this patch. Fedora requires it's own optflags.
> Please see:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
I dropped this patch.
> * Please preserve the timestamps of the files for which you fix the encoding.
> You can use
>touch -r original_file encoding_fixed_file
> for this purpose.
Done.
> ! Please make the %description span 80 columns.
??? The length of the longest line in description is 70 chars.
> ? The file engines/Phalanx-XXII/phalanx.h contains occurences of
> /usr/local/lib. Does this affect anything?
It works.
> * All relevant doc files should be packaged. There are many documentation
> files
> scattered around the tarball. Can you go through them and include the relevant
> ones in %doc ?
What docs did you mean? It is not necessary to include scid/html/*.html files
because they are included into /usr/bin/scid file.
>
> * Buildroot does not obey Fedora guidelines. Please see:
>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
>
> * BR: gcc-c++ can be removed. Please see:
>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
>
> * Requires: tk can be removed. rpmbuild will pick this dependency itself.
Done.
> ! We prefer installing the icons under %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor. So the
> %SOURCE3 file should go to %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor
> You will also need to take a look at the icon cache scriptlets after this
> change:
>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
Done.
> * Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
> section
> of Packaging Guidelines . You use %{name} at certain locations and scid on
> other. The former one is preferred (except, possibly in URL).
>
> Also, if you want to use %{__mv}, %{__sed} style macros, do it for all the
> commands in the SPEC file, or just replace them with regular commands, e.g.
> mv,
> sed.
Done.
> ! The line
>--remove-category Application \
> is not needed since you already don't have Application as category in the
> .desktop file you supply. Even if you did, you should just remove it from the
> .desktop file yourself before compiling the SRPM.
Done.
> * Latest version must be packaged, which is 3.7.1 for the time being. Please
> update. Also make sure you check the bases/* issue.
Done.
> * Package does not honor Fedora specific optimization flags (see above). You
> can probably pass OPTIMIZE=%{optflags} to configure to overcome this. (I found
> this by issuing
>./configure --help
Done.
> * Parallel make must be supported whenever possible. If it is not supported,
> this should be noted in the SPEC file as a comment. See:
>http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2/paral
Done.
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
--- Comment #13 from Orcan Ogetbil 2009-04-03 05:36:05
---
Corrections:
(In reply to comment #12)
uild will pick this dependency itself.
>
> ! We prefer installing the icons under %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor. So the
> %SOURCE3 file should go to %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor
Should be
%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/
* issue.
>
> * Package does not honor Fedora specific optimization flags (see above). You
> can probably pass OPTIMIZE=%{optflags} to configure to overcome this.
Should be OPTIMIZE="%{optflags}".
Please let me know if you have any questions/comments/objections.
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310
Orcan Ogetbil changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||oget.fed...@gmail.com
--- Comment #12 from Orcan Ogetbil 2009-04-03 05:29:55
---
Here is my initial review for this package. I still have to check the license
issue:
* rpmlint says:
scid.src:71: W: configure-without-libdir-spec
This is not GNU configure, so we don't need to use the %configure macro. Also
libdir is irrelevant for this package. Thus this warning can be ignored.
scid-books.x86_64: W: no-documentation
books/readme.txt should be included as a %doc to this subpackage.
scid-sounds.x86_64: W: no-documentation
There is not much we can do about this. Ignored.
* Patches should be explained (as comments in the SPEC file), and, if they are
not Fedora specific, should be submitted upstream and the corresponding bug
tracker links should be provided.
* About the patches:
scid-makefile-engines.patch
- Please use the -p switch for "install" command to preserve timestamps.
In general, we want to conserve the timestamps of all non-compiled
files.
- You said bases/* is excluded by purpose, and upstream was working on
them. Any updates on this latest release (3.7.1)?
scid-makefile-phalanx.patch
- We don't want this patch. Fedora requires it's own optflags.
Please see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
* Please preserve the timestamps of the files for which you fix the encoding.
You can use
touch -r original_file encoding_fixed_file
for this purpose.
! Please make the %description span 80 columns.
? The file engines/Phalanx-XXII/phalanx.h contains occurences of
/usr/local/lib. Does this affect anything?
* All relevant doc files should be packaged. There are many documentation files
scattered around the tarball. Can you go through them and include the relevant
ones in %doc ?
* Buildroot does not obey Fedora guidelines. Please see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
* BR: gcc-c++ can be removed. Please see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
* Requires: tk can be removed. rpmbuild will pick this dependency itself.
! We prefer installing the icons under %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor. So the
%SOURCE3 file should go to %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor
You will also need to take a look at the icon cache scriptlets after this
change:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
* Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section
of Packaging Guidelines . You use %{name} at certain locations and scid on
other. The former one is preferred (except, possibly in URL).
Also, if you want to use %{__mv}, %{__sed} style macros, do it for all the
commands in the SPEC file, or just replace them with regular commands, e.g. mv,
sed.
! The line
--remove-category Application \
is not needed since you already don't have Application as category in the
.desktop file you supply. Even if you did, you should just remove it from the
.desktop file yourself before compiling the SRPM.
* Latest version must be packaged, which is 3.7.1 for the time being. Please
update. Also make sure you check the bases/* issue.
* Package does not honor Fedora specific optimization flags (see above). You
can probably pass OPTIMIZE=%{optflags} to configure to overcome this. (I found
this by issuing
./configure --help
* Parallel make must be supported whenever possible. If it is not supported,
this should be noted in the SPEC file as a comment. See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2/paral
--
Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #11 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-01-30 20:31:37 --- (In reply to comment #1) > So, basically it's GPL. It should be asked on fedora-legal list is it > acceptable in Fedora. Unfortunately I didn't received any response from Eugene Nalimov. That's why fedora-legal decision was obvious: === We should not ship Eugene's code. We have no permission. === But Nalimov code can be distributed with scid, because scid developers obtained permissions many years ago. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #10 from Thorsten Leemhuis 2009-01-22 18:27:00 --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > To find a sponsor and a reviewer it might help if you help reviewing other > > packages in the review queue (check the dependency tree for Bug 2). Those > > reviews will be unofficial if you are not sponsored, but it'll help to get > > familiar with the packaging guidelines and will show your effort to get > > involved in the project, which might help to find a sponsor. > It is something new for me. Sorry, It iirc isn't explained properly in the fedora wiki (someone might correct me if it is); but googling for 'fedora "review exchange"' or something like that should turn up a few mails that should explain the idea. Basically it boils down to: reviewing is boring, but it's definitely needed. So the idea to exchange reviews (foo reviews bar's package and bar reviews foo's package) often gets people to do reviews, as they have a benefit from it: Both learn the guidelines/rpm packaging better and both get their packages into the repos. > I read guidelines throughout and carefully wrote a spec file. Thanks for your work. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #9 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-01-20 21:10:32 --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > Does something blocking the review process? > > Well, you need a sponsor afaics (or are you and existing Fedora contributor?). > We didn't have that situation yet in RPM Fuson, as all existing contributors > also contribute to Fedora and thus were automatically sponsored. So it's > something new for all of us. You are right, I am not a Fedora contributor. > To find a sponsor and a reviewer it might help if you help reviewing other > packages in the review queue (check the dependency tree for Bug 2). Those > reviews will be unofficial if you are not sponsored, but it'll help to get > familiar with the packaging guidelines and will show your effort to get > involved in the project, which might help to find a sponsor. It is something new for me. I read guidelines throughout and carefully wrote a spec file. I thought that it was enough. Anyway I will see what I can do. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #8 from Thorsten Leemhuis 2009-01-20 18:57:06 --- (In reply to comment #7) > Does something blocking the review process? Well, you need a sponsor afaics (or are you and existing Fedora contributor?). We didn't have that situation yet in RPM Fuson, as all existing contributors also contribute to Fedora and thus were automatically sponsored. So it's something new for all of us. To find a sponsor and a reviewer it might help if you help reviewing other packages in the review queue (check the dependency tree for Bug 2). Those reviews will be unofficial if you are not sponsored, but it'll help to get familiar with the packaging guidelines and will show your effort to get involved in the project, which might help to find a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #7 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-01-19 16:29:55 --- Does something blocking the review process? Please let me know. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #6 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-01-11 11:50:34 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Also, license on scid/bases, scid/books and scid/sounds should be clarified. scid/bases are GPL scid/books/Elo2400.bin and scid/books/gm2600.bin are GPL scid/books/Performance.bin and scid/books/varied.bin are freely redistributable scid/sounds - Scid developers said that sounds are GPL. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #5 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-01-10 20:47:40 --- (In reply to comment #4) > Few notes about package itself: > > - Package version should be like 3.7.0-0.12.beta3. Read more at > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PreReleasePackages > > - Source tag should contain full URL. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL > > - Better to remove "--vendor kalenkov" from desktop-file-install call. Updated SPEC - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid.spec SRPM - http://katrine.lpi.ru/kalenkov/fusion/scid-3.7.0-0.2.beta3.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #4 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-01-10 14:15:39 --- Few notes about package itself: - Package version should be like 3.7.0-0.12.beta3. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PreReleasePackages - Source tag should contain full URL. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL - Better to remove "--vendor kalenkov" from desktop-file-install call. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #3 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-01-10 13:20:57 --- Ok, thanks for explanations. Could you ask fedora-legal about Nalimov code? -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 --- Comment #2 from Mikhail Kalenkov 2009-01-10 12:28:59 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Will this package be actually useful without Nalimov's code? And does it > contain tablebases? In 99% cases Nalimov code is not used, because it is important only in endgame. The point is that I am not interested in scid without Nalimov code. Scid package doesn't contain tablebases because of the large size of it (about 7Gb for the 5-piece tablebases). > Why can't this package go to Fedora? It has the following text in COPYING: > > As I > understand the GPL, it basically means you can distribute Scid freely, > and may modify it, but any modifications you make must also be made > freely available as source code under the terms of the GPL. > > So, basically it's GPL. It should be asked on fedora-legal list is it > acceptable in Fedora. Without books, bases and Nalimov code scid is GPL. >From COPYING concerning Nalimov code * Please note: although there is no explicit copyright notice in the tablebase decoding code, all rights are reserved by its author Eugene Nalimov and you should ask for permission before using it. He has granted permission for its distribution in Scid, and out of courtesy I ask that if you make use of the tablebase code outside of Scid, please ask Eugene first. His email address is at the end of the file src/egtb/probe.txt. *** > > Also, license on scid/bases, scid/books and scid/sounds should be clarified. OK. > And it doesn't install scid/bases, is it desired? Currently scid doesn't work fluently with read-only training bases. That's why I didn't include it into package. Scid developers are planning to fix this bug. -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
[Bug 310] scid - A chess database application
http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=310 Alexey Torkhov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||atork...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-01-10 11:46:09 --- Will this package be actually useful without Nalimov's code? And does it contain tablebases? Why can't this package go to Fedora? It has the following text in COPYING: As I understand the GPL, it basically means you can distribute Scid freely, and may modify it, but any modifications you make must also be made freely available as source code under the terms of the GPL. So, basically it's GPL. It should be asked on fedora-legal list is it acceptable in Fedora. Also, license on scid/bases, scid/books and scid/sounds should be clarified. And it doesn't install scid/bases, is it desired? -- Configure bugmail: http://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.
