Bug 196379

Targetted for fc6+

Rex i got error in mock build
error: unpacking of archive failed on file
/builddir/build/SOURCES/kdegraphics-3.5.3.tar.bz2;449b7b15: cpio: read failed -
Invalid argument
Error installing srpm: kdegraphics-extras-3.5.3-3.src.rpm

oops wrong copy/paste 
anyway i am not able to download SRPM can you check SRPM link

url got truncated (missed .rpm):

fixed SRPM URL:
http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/kdeartwork-extras-3.5.3-6.src.rpm

unpacking WORKSFORME.

rpmlint -i kdegraphics-extras-3.5.3-3.src.rpm
error checking signature of kdegraphics-extras-3.5.3-3.src.rpm

WORKSFORME:
$rpmlint -i kdegraphics-extras-3.5.3-3.src.rpm

You apparently don't have by gpg key, fetch from
http://kde-redhat.sourceforge.net/

WORKSFORME:
and builds in mock.

Is this targeted for FC6 or FC7?

fc6 (and newer)

Then, where is the newest SPEC file and SRPM?

Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/kdeartwork-extras.spec
SRPM URL:
http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/kdeartwork-extras-3.5.4-2.src

%changelog
* Tue Aug 29 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 3.5.4-2
- used unversioned Requires: kdebase

* Tue Jul 25 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 3.5.4-1
- kde-3.5.4

I will review this later.

Well,

1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines :

* rpmlint is not silent.
W: kdeartwork-extras macro-in-%changelog _libdir
W: kdeartwork-extras macro-in-%changelog _libexecdir
   Use %% to avoild having macros expanded.

* Requires:
  - Does this package (kdeartwork-extras) really require
    xscreensaver related packages? It is someting like
    "optional", isn't it? Perhaps there are some users
    who don't want to install xscreensaver-gl-extras.

    I also wonder why this package require xscreensaver-base.
    Perhaps KDE has its own screensaver mechanism isn't it?
    (I use GNOME and xscreensave as screensaver, so I don't
     know well about KDE).

* BuildRequires:
  - Is xscreensaver-base really required?

2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines :
   = Nothing.

3. Other things I have noticed:
A. request:
   * Desktop files corresponding to the following hacks are missing
     - glschool (in xscreensaver-gl-extras)
     - topblock (in xscreensaver-gl-extras)
     Would you add the desktop files for these hacks?

   * IMO, the hacks in the following package can also be used for 
     this package. 
     rss-glx (in extras and maintained by Nils Philippsen)
     xdaliclock (in extras and maintained by Chris Ricker)

     Would you add the corresponding desktop files or ask the
     maintainers to support this package?

Another one question.

Does "sourc"ing Qt config files (/etc/profile.d/qt.sh) still needed?
At least mockbuild surely "source" all files under /etc/profile.d and
explicit "sourc"ing qt.sh is unnecessary.

I can see many packages which use qt for rebuilding and don't "source"
qt.sh explicitly under:
http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/

> Does "sourc"ing Qt config files (/etc/profile.d/qt.sh) still needed?

Strictly speaking, no, not for mock anyway.  otoh, it's presence certainly is
not wrong nor does it cause any harm.

> Does this package (kdeartwork-extras) really require
> xscreensaver related packages?

Yes, most of the bundled screensavers actually use xscreensaver as the backend.

> It is someting like
>    "optional", isn't it? Perhaps there are some users
>    who don't want to install xscreensaver-gl-extras.

Without more package splitting, no.  The manual work required to make that work
properly simply isn't worth it, imo.

>   - Is xscreensaver-base really required?

Yes.  %%configure checks for the presence of the xscreensaver bits at buildtime.

>    * Desktop files corresponding to the following hacks are missing

Personally, I'm not interested in adding those by hand.  IMO, it's an upstream
issue (ie, I'd prefer to let them "fix" it).

>    * IMO, the hacks in the following package can also be used for 
>     this package. 

I'll ping upstream about these too.

> W: kdeartwork-extras macro-in-%changelog _libdir
> W: kdeartwork-extras macro-in-%changelog _libexecdir
>   Use %% to avoild having macros expanded.

Oops, will fix that.

(In reply to comment #15)

> >   - Is xscreensaver-base really required?
> 
> Yes.  %%configure checks for the presence of the xscreensaver bits at buildtime.
Actually I tried mockbuild with xscreensaver-base removed from
BuildRequires and
* mockbuild suceeded without any failure
* the results of "rpm -qlp" and "rpm -ql --requires" make no difference

It seems that configure checks where xscreensaver hacks are installed and
does not check if xscreensaver daemon is installed.

I still wonder why this package requires xscreensaver-base (for Requires:).
KDE uses its own screensaver daemon, doesn't it? Does this package
require xscreensaver daemon or xscreensaver configuration program?
 
> > W: kdeartwork-extras macro-in-%changelog _libdir
> > W: kdeartwork-extras macro-in-%changelog _libexecdir
> >   Use %% to avoild having macros expanded.
> 
> Oops, will fix that.
> 

Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/kdeartwork-extras.spec
SRPM URL:
http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/kdeartwork-extras-3.5.4-3.src

%changelog
* Sat Sep 30 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 3.5.4-3
- use %%_foo style macros in %%changelog


> I still wonder why this package requires xscreensaver-base (for Requires:).

Because many of the kde screensavers actually use xscreensaver.  In the absense
of the xscreensaver bits, the screensavers will be listed as being available,
but they won't actually work or do anything.

> Actually I tried mockbuild with xscreensaver-base removed from
> BuildRequires and
> * mockbuild suceeded without any failure

But do all the xscreensaver-based screensavers actually *work*?  I'd venture
possibly not, because %configure checks for the hacks location at buildtime, and
in the absense of that, it may just end up guessing.

Umm..  I must explain why I wonder for xscreensaver-base dependency
as xscreensaver maintainer in FE.

(In reply to comment #17))
> Because many of the kde screensavers actually use xscreensaver
What do you mean by "many of the kde screensavers"? 

This means that many KDE screensaver "hacks" (not "daemon") uses xscreensaver
"daemon" (i.e. /usr/bin/xscreensaver) ? 

(In reply to comment #18)
> But do all the xscreensaver-based screensavers actually *work*?  
> I'd venture possibly not, because %configure checks for the hacks 
> location at buildtime, and
> in the absense of that, it may just end up guessing.

Yes, configure of this package tries to check for the path of xscreensaver
hacks, and NO hacks are included in xscreensaver-base. So mockbuild without
xscreensaver-base correctly finds correctly all xscreensaver hacks 
(as all hacks are installed in the two hacks).

xscreensaver-base includes only the files related to xscreensaver "daemon".
And all the hacks packaged in xscreensaver-{extras,gl-extras} can actually
work without xscreensaver-base because all hacks in xscreensaver does NOT use
xscreensaver daemon, they are completely stand-alone.
This is why xscreensaver-extras, xscreensaver-gl-extras does not require
xscreensaver-base (this is very intentional), and gnome-screensaver 
can use xscreensaver-related hacks without xscreensaver-base.

Oops..

> (as all hacks are installed in the two hacks)
I meant: (as all hacks are installed in the two packages)

Thanks for the explanation (though I personally would have named the pkgs
differently so that was more clear).

Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/kdeartwork-extras.spec
SRPM URL:
http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/kdeartwork-extras-3.5.4-4.src

%changelog
* Sun Oct 01 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 3.5.4-4
- extras: drop (Build)Requires: xscreensaver-base

Source doesn't seem to have a copy of GPL license. Please
ask upstream to include GPL copy.

Other things are okay.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
  This package (kdeartwork-extras) is APPROVED by me.

Thanks.

imported...