[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #21 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-09-23 19:49:39 EDT --- Waiting to hear back from upstream about possible fixes/changes. Will definitely update the bug when I hear something new. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #20 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-09-22 19:46:51 EDT --- Any update? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #19 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-07-09 15:41:01 EDT --- hmm...I was sure I fixed the suggestions about ldconfig and the libdir. Must have got my spec files confused. Guess that's what happens when you don't use version control :/ I'll check with upstream to see what can be done about the compiler flags and I'll start testing in F11. Thanks for the review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103
--- Comment #18 from Michael Schwendt 2009-07-09
02:39:18 EDT ---
* It fails to build on Fedora 11:
| channel.c:146: warning: conflicting types for built-in function 'log'
| user.c: In function 'users_in_channel':
| user.c:299: warning: passing argument 4 of 'qsort' from incompatible pointer
type
/usr/include/stdlib.h:710: note: expected '__compar_fn_t' but argument is of
type 'int (*)(void *, void *)'
| regex.c:34: error: static declaration of 'strndup' follows non-static
declaration
| make[1]: *** [regex.lo] Error 1
Indeed, regex.c includes and declares its own one just a few lines
further down in the file.
* It doesn't adhere to the compiler flags guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags
The flags you should see in the build log are those printed by "rpm --eval
%{optflags}". Since %configure exports them (see "rpm --eval %configure"), but
the bnirc source tarball doesn't accept the variables passed in from the
outside, it may be necessary to apply a patch.
* Issues pointed out in bottom of comment 10 are not fixed yet.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #17 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-07-03 16:10:47 EDT --- Good news. Upstream made requested changes(renaming libraries) so I had a chance to create new packages. Please review and let me know if there is anything else that needs changing. SPEC: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC.spec RPM: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-1.1.2-1.fc10.i386.rpm SRPM: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-1.1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm DEVEL: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-devel-1.1.2-1.fc10.i386.rpm 830c2a3d2ac694ac23900f35805e8ff4 bnIRC-1.1.2-1.fc10.i386.rpm 050865e2fcf07c2bc9c8e210392231fe bnIRC-1.1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm cfb5e3af3f1f2f5403c1b4ba0381e68b bnIRC-devel-1.1.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 Tom Wisniewski changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(twisnie+fed...@gm | |ail.com)| --- Comment #16 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-05-22 09:20:33 EDT --- Currently waiting for the dev of this program to make some changes to the names of certain libraries. I have confirmation from the dev that he's working on it but life has been getting in the way and delaying the changes. As soon as I have a new version of the software, I'll make a new RPM and upload it for review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(twisnie+fed...@gm ||ail.com) --- Comment #15 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-05-22 04:31:19 EDT --- What is the status of this bug? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #14 from Michael Schwendt 2009-03-31 14:03:30 EDT --- If you increase the %version, you can and should reset %release to 1: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Release [Basically, package 1.1.2-1.fc10 means "the 1st release/build of version 1.1.2 for Fedora 10"...] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #13 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-03-31 08:41:57 EDT --- So as I wait for upstream to make the necessary changes, I have a quick question about package naming. Since upstream is making changes to the code, they will most likely release it as 1.1.2. How should I deal with this in my rpm? Right now my rpm is called bnIRC-1.1.1-6.fc10.src.rpm. Once the newer version of source is out, would I name my rpm bnIRC-1.1.2-7.fc10.src.rpm, basically changing the software version number and incrementing the release number by 1, or do I have to start the release numbering from scratch since it's a new upstream version number? So the new name should be bnIRC-1.1.2-1.fc10.src.rpm. Just trying to prepare for when upstream makes the required changes. thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #12 from Michael Schwendt 2009-03-15 06:34:25 EDT --- If all the plugin libraries (and specifically their library SONAME values) were renamed to put them into a namespace that is much more specific to this application, that would make it unnecessary to filter rpmbuild's automatic Provides/Requires. The risk that any other library package would introduce a shared library with a SONAME like libbnirc_plugin_SOMETHING.so.0 would be very low. And as such I would approve that as a valid work-around. [...] Here's a run-time error: RegisterTab called added python tab hook Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/bnIRC-1.1.1/scripts/toc.py", line 15, in import whrandom ImportError : No module named whrandom script error! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103
--- Comment #11 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-03-14
11:34:10 EDT ---
Thanks for the quick reply.
I'll make sure to remove the post and postun sections from the devel package.
I'll also remove the asterisk from the %{_libdir}/bnIRC/* line.
You say that the library names are still a major blocker for this package. I
just want to make sure I understand your suggestion. If I were to talk to
upstream and have them rename the libraries, that is all that would be needed
for me to get this package approved? Or would I still have to jump through
some hoops to have the libraries accepted?
Please let me know and I'll try talking to upstream about your suggestions.
Thanks again.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103
--- Comment #10 from Michael Schwendt 2009-03-13
17:43:12 EDT ---
* The plugin loader evaluates the libtool .la files and dlopen()s the library
with the file name found in the "dlname=" parameter, e.g. libdcc.so.0, which in
turn is a symlink to libdcc.so.0.0.0
The statically linked plugins 'lib*.a' are not needed as they cannot be loaded
at run-time.
The plugin symlinks 'lib*.so' are not needed either.
The program could be patched to simply name the plugins 'lib*.so' and dlopen()
them directly instead of looking at the .la files.
* Please look at "rpm --query --provides bnIRC". Currently, the plugin
libraries produce several automatic SONAME Provides, which bear the risk of
causing conflicts with other packages during dependency resolving:
libctcp.so.0
libdcc.so.0
libdebug.so.0
libhello.so.0
libio_ncurses.so.0
libirc_input.so.0
libpython.so.0
librserver.so.0
libserver_strings.so.0
This is a blocker, even if one could show that no other Fedora package
currently provides libraries with the same SONAMEs. I haven't tried that, but I
could imagine packages such as "libdcc", "libctcp", "librserver", for example,
with similar library sonames.
The package also contains automatic "Requires" for the same library SONAMEs.
The least thing that could be done is to filter these self-Provides and
self-Requires out. Various docs exist, in the Wiki and on Google,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/FilteringAutomaticDependencies
but disabling rpmbuild's internal dependency generator is dangerous, and one
must carefully examine the results.
It would be good, if upstream could use a unique namespace for these plugins,
e.g. like libbnirc_plugin_foo.so.0
> %post devel -p /sbin/ldconfig
> %postun devel -p /sbin/ldconfig
These are a no-op and can be deleted. The scriptlets in the main pkg are the
ones that are correct and needed.
> %{_libdir}/bnIRC/*
Directory %{_libdir}/bnIRC is not included.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #9 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-03-13 16:40:36 EDT --- Alright, I made some changes based on the feedback and they're all available at the links below SPEC: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC.spec RPM: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-1.1.1-6.fc10.i386.rpm SRPM: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-1.1.1-6.fc10.src.rpm DEVEL RPM: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-devel-1.1.1-6.fc10.i386.rpm eed9f0123b0695c63072eeeb37a66114 bnIRC-1.1.1-6.fc10.i386.rpm a836f791a84132e0cdc280ddf7ea8867 bnIRC-1.1.1-6.fc10.src.rpm 8f22430b1299a368a1ebc93ef75bbeb0 bnIRC-devel-1.1.1-6.fc10.i386.rpm Now that I added some of the libs to the main package I get warnings when I run rpmlint. Since they're plugins, they do belong in the main package like mentioned in the previous comment made by Michael Schwendt. Not sure if I need to do something differently to get rid of the warnings or if they can be left alone. Any and all comments are welcome. thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103
--- Comment #8 from Michael Schwendt 2009-03-07
05:08:32 EDT ---
> -License: GPLv2+
> +License: GPLv2
Confirmed. The source files explicitly say "LICENSE: GPL Version 2".
> +%package devel
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
> +Group: Applications/Internet
That sounds wrong for the bnIRC-devel package. More likely the group is
"Development/Libraries". Even if the package contained just a plugin API, there
would not be a more accurate RPM Group.
> -%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
> -
> -%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
Deleting them is not right. The previous .spec file was correct. Put them back.
> -%{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}
> +%{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/*
With this change, the directory is not included. Please revert.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories
> +%files devel
> +%defattr(-,root,root,-)
> +%{_prefix}/src/*
Don't include %_prefix/src. These are included in the automatically generated
-debuginfo package. If that doesn't work for you, install the
"redhat-rpm-config".
> +%{_libdir}/bnIRC/*
These are the application's plugins. They belong into the main package.
> +%{_libdir}/libbnirc.a
> +%{_libdir}/libbnirc.la
These are not needed and must not be included. You can %exclude it or remove it
in the %install section.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
> +%{_libdir}/libbnirc.so
This is the softlink that really belongs into the -devel package. It is needed
when compiling/linking with -lbnirc
> +%{_libdir}/libbnirc.so.0
> +%{_libdir}/libbnirc.so.0.0.0
These two belong into the main application package.
Your %changelog doesn't comment on several of the spec changes between release
3 and 5. It is good practise to document and explain non-trivial modifications.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #7 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-02-13 15:57:14 EDT --- Alright. Finally found some free time to work on this again. I have split the rpm into two packages, the rpm and a devel rpm. The links are below. Please have a look and let me know what else needs to be changed. Thanks again for all suggestions/feedback. Spec URL: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC.spec RPM URL: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-1.1.1-5.fc10.i386.rpm SRPM URL: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-1.1.1-5.fc10.src.rpm DEVEL RPM URL: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-devel-1.1.1-5.fc10.i386.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 Michael Schwendt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- Comment #6 from Michael Schwendt 2009-02-09 15:41:10 EDT --- > Aren't 'Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig' and 'Requires(postun): > /sbin/ldconfig' missing? No, they are automatic if /sbin/ldconfig is set as scriptlet processor via option -p. [...] * The entire /usr tree is mispackaged: Package must not include directories /usr/include /usr/lib /usr/lib/debug /usr/share /usr/share/man /usr/share/man/man1 /usr/src /usr/src/debug and no files below /usr/src and /usr/lib/debug either. Where files below /usr/include and /usr/lib are needed (in the -devel subpackage), prefix the paths with %_includedir and %_libdir. Use %_mandir as prefix for files below /usr/share/man * It must not include /usr/lib/debug/ as those files are automatically put into the -debuginfo subpackage. * It must not include /usr/share and not anything in /usr/src either, which is another side-effect of using %_prefix/* as a bad catch-all for all files below /usr * Including static libs as plugins makes no sense. It likely loads the *.so or *.so.0 files. Perhaps the *.la, but not the *.a libs. * The %doc file "INSTALL" is irrelevant to your package users. * The %doc file "NEWS" is empty. You can remove it for now and add a guard in %prep which exists if NEWS is larger than zero. Then you can include it. * rpmlint also reports an executable .spec file. * Including the "config.h" autoheader file in the public API is dangerous. Values in it bear the risk of conflicting with any API-user that uses an own config.h file. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter 2009-01-19 17:40:49 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329407) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329407) rpmlint output There are still some issues. - From my point of view, the name should be bnirc.spec https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Case_Sensitivity https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Spec_file_name - One line per BR would be nice - The %file section needs some work - duplicates - ownership - You need to make a devel subpackage - *.la files must be deleted https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries The rpmlint output [...@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint bnIRC* bnIRC.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/src/debug/bnIRC-1.1.1/plugins/server_strings/server_strings.c bnIRC.i386: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/bnirc.debug bnIRC.i386: E: statically-linked-binary /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/bnirc.debug 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 22 errors, 75 warnings. see attachment for full details -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter 2009-01-19 05:47:14 EDT --- I will do a full review soon but be aware I can't sponsor you. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #3 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-01-16 23:25:55 EDT --- Forgot to provide the new links. SRC RPM: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC-1.1.1-3.fc10.src.rpm SPEC FILE: http://dev.zerogin.com/bnIRC.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 --- Comment #2 from Tom Wisniewski 2009-01-15 20:49:00 EDT --- Thanks for your input. Much appreciated. I went ahead and made the appropriate changes and uploaded a new set of rpm's. I have to admit, the %changelog thing took me a while to figure out. I kept staring at it and staring at it, but not seeing what's wrong. I then noticed that I was missing the version/release number :) I had a look through the Fedora Guidelines for the %post ldconfig sections but didn't see any reference to 'Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig. I then did a quick google search and came across the following bugzilla entry which mentions that '%post -p /sbin/ldconfig' notation automatically mentions 'Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig'. So I left 'Requires(post):' out. If it's really needed, please let me know and I'll add it in. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426599 When running rpmlint against the RPM, I do have errors. They seem to have something to do with ownership of directories. Here is a sample: bnIRC.i386: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share Not quite sure what I can do differently in my spec file to fix this. I can only assume I would have to make changes to my %files section and/or %defattr, but I have no idea what to change. Once again, any and all feedback/guidance is really appreciated. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103
Fabian Affolter changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fab...@bernewireless.net
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter 2009-01-15
06:54:17 EDT ---
Just some quick comments on your spec file.
- There is no need for '%define name bnIRC' and '%define version 1.1.1' because
'Name:' and 'Version:' can be used as macros later.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#Macros
- Source0: should point to the upstream location of the tarball.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
- 'BuildRoot:' please use on of the examples in the guidelines
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
- Your %description is too long. Didn't rpmlint complain about this?
- Please preserve the time stamps in your %install section if possible
make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} INSTALL="install -p"
- You are using '%post -p /sbin/ldconfig' and '%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig'.
Aren't 'Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig' and 'Requires(postun):
/sbin/ldconfig' missing?
- Please use one of the formating style from the guidelines for your %changelog
entry
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480103] Review Request: bnIRC - An ncurses based IRC client and modular IRC framework.(Need Sponsorship. First time Packager)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480103 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
