Bug 195223
| Summary: | Review Request: pavucontrol: Volume control for PulseAudio | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Pierre Ossman <pierre-bugzilla> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Rex Dieter <rdieter> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | davidf, green, lpoetter |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | j:
fedora-cvs+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2006-09-09 18:05:22 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | 195221 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 163779 | ||
|
Description
Pierre Ossman
2006-06-14 15:24:16 UTC
Spec URL: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/pulseaudio/pavucontrol.spec SRPM URL: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/pulseaudio/pavucontrol-0.9.2-1.src.rpm Spec URL: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/pulseaudio/pavucontrol.spec SRPM URL: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/pulseaudio/pavucontrol-0.9.3-1.src.rpm Quick note: 1. Desktop file handling does not conform to Fe guidelines. Refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-254ddf07aae20a23ced8cecc219d8f73926e9755 I read that portion of the guidelines as relating to the case of when you have to include a .desktop file yourself (i.e. when upstream doesn't have one). If not, I would have expected a "rm" somewhere in the script to first kill off the .desktop file the Makefiles have installed. You would simply add something like:
desktop-file-install --vendor fedora --delete-original \
--dir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications \
--add-category X-Fedora \
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
to the install section of your spec file.
So that the .desktop file (name) doesn't vary from upstream, I'd suggest using: --vendor="" instead. spec looks clean,simple, just
* MUST: add to %install section
desktop-file-install \
--dir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications \
--add-category="X-Fedora" --vendor="" \
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
do that, and pending my confirmation for building in mock and rpmlint sanity
checking, I'll APPROVE this.
Spec URL: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/pulseaudio/pavucontrol.spec SRPM URL: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/pulseaudio/pavucontrol-0.9.4-1.src.rpm (In reply to comment #6) > So that the .desktop file (name) doesn't vary from upstream, I'd suggest > using: > --vendor="" > instead. Rex, maybe I'm missing something here. Why does it matter if you are setting the vendor? > Why does it matter if you are setting the vendor?
What *matters* is that .desktop files not get renamed, and adding --vendor does
just that.
(In reply to comment #10) > > Why does it matter if you are setting the vendor? > > What *matters* is that .desktop files not get renamed, and adding --vendor does > just that. I was aware that adding the vendor changes the desktop filename, but I guess my question is why does it matter if the desktop file gets renamed? Plenty of packages in extras do it. > why does it matter if the desktop file gets renamed? Lots of reasons, one of which is menu editing. > Plenty of packages in extras do it. I know, but they (mostly) shouldn't have. But, since the files were renamed once, they probably ought to stay that way (else we'd comitt the sin of renaming them *again*). Spec URL: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/pulseaudio/pavucontrol.spec SRPM URL: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/pulseaudio/pavucontrol-0.9.4-2.src.rpm BR added. One possible simplification is replace in %files:
%dir %{_datadir}/pavucontrol
%{_datadir}/pavucontrol/pavucontrol.glade
with
%{_datadir}/pavucontrol/
mock builds fine, rpmlint is happy: $rpmlint pavucontrol-0.9.4-2.fc6.i386.rpm 386.rpm W: pavucontrol incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.9.4-2 0.9.4-2.fc6 APPROVED. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: pavucontrol Updated Fedora Owners: lpoetter,drzeus-bugzilla Sorry, I forgot the justification for the owner change: I am upstream for this package and Pierre agreed to co-maintain this package with me from now on. CVS done. |