Bug 204461

Created attachment 135118 [details]
Mock build log of kita-0.177.3-3

This package can be rebuilt in mock cleanly.

rpmlint is silent.

shouldn't this directory be owned as well :
%{_datadir}/apps/kita/

No need for
Requires(post,postun): %{_bindir}/update-desktop-database
Requires(post,postun):  %{_bindir}/gtk-update-icon-cache

Per the ScriptletSnippets wiki, no need to add dependancies for these.

To the comment #2 :

You mean that this package SHOULD NOT own the directory?
If you mean that this package SHOULD, it is already because

%{_datadir}/apps/kita/ equals to

%dir %{_datadir}/apps/kita/
%{_datadir}/apps/kita/*

This directory is used only by this package, so owning this package is
necessary.

To comment #3 :
Why? %post and %postun uses these commands. 

> Why? %post and %postun uses these commands. 

They need not necessarily be present at install-time, hence the presence of ||:
at the end of each command.  For more details, please read the ScriptletSnippets
wiki.

(In reply to comment #5)
> > Why? %post and %postun uses these commands. 
> 
> They need not necessarily be present at install-time, hence the presence of ||:
> at the end of each command.  For more details, please read the ScriptletSnippets
> wiki.

Okay. I removed those. spec, srpm are updated:
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SPECS/kita.spec
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SRPMS/kita-0.177.3-4.src.rpm

All of this:
if [ -d %{_prefix}/lib64 ] ; then
   SUF=64
else
   SUF=
fi

for f in %{_prefix}/lib$SUF/qt-* ; do
   QTDIR=$f
done
...
--with-qt-libraries=...

Can be omitted, and put this in  before calling %configure:
unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh

which will setup the QT env. vars automatically/appropriately.

(In reply to comment #7)
> 
> Can be omitted, and put this in  before calling %configure:
> unset QTDIR || : ; . /etc/profile.d/qt.sh
> 
> which will setup the QT env. vars automatically/appropriately.

Well, configure seems to accept QTLIB. Again updated so as to
call qt.sh :
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SPECS/kita.spec
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SRPMS/kita-0.177.3-5.src.rpm

MUST Items:

- MUST: rpmlint's output is clean
- MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}
- MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: The package is licensed (GPL) with an open-source compatible license and
meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
- MUST: the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file,
then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is
included in %doc.
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
- MUST: The spec file for the package is be legible. 
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
- MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least i386.
- MUST: All build dependencies is listed in BuildRequires.

*******

kdelibs-devel already requires qt-devel, libacl-devel, libart_lgpl-devel,
arts-devel, pcre-devel, zlib-devel

chitlesh(SPECS)[0]$rpm -qR kdelibs-devel
/bin/sh
arts-devel
bzip2-devel
fam-devel
kdelibs = 6:3.5.4-0.1.fc5
libacl-devel
libart_lgpl-devel
libc.so.6
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)
libidn-devel
libjpeg-devel
libqt-mt.so.3
libstdc++.so.6
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)
libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)
libtiff-devel
libxslt-devel
openssl-devel
pcre-devel
qt-devel >= 1:3.3.6
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
zlib-devel


*******

- MUST: The spec file handles locales properly.
- MUST: If the package does not contain shared library files located in the
dynamic linker's default paths
- MUST: the package is not designed to be relocatable
- MUST: the package owns all directories that it creates.
- MUST: the package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
- MUST: Permissions on files are set properly.
- MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros section
of Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content. This is described in
detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
- MUST: There are no Large documentation files
- MUST: %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it
is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present.
- MUST: There are no Header files or static libraries 
- MUST: The package does not contain library files with a suffix 
- MUST: Package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives
- MUST: Package containing GUI applications includes a %{name}.desktop file, and
that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install
section.
- MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. 

SHOULD Items:

 - SHOULD: The source package does include license text(s) as COPYING
 - SHOULD: mock builds succcessfully in i386.
 - SHOULD: The reviewer tested that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
 - SHOULD: No subpackages present.

This package lookss good to me.
Clean the BR, then I'll approuve it afterwards

Created attachment 135188 [details]
Mock build log of kita-0.177.3-6

(In reply to comment #9)

> Clean the BR

Ah...
Actually anything other than
     kdelibs-devel desktop-file-utils
disappered....

Again I updated spec and srpm.
http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SPECS/kita.spec

http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SRPMS/kita-0.177.3-6.src.rpm

This package (kita-0.177.3-6) havs been APPROUVED !

(In reply to comment #11)
> This package (kita-0.177.3-6) havs been APPROUVED !

Thank you!!

Well, unset QTLIB was my misunderstanging, it should be
unset QTDIR. Finally 
* 0.177.3-8 is pushed
* rebuild for devel succeeded.
http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=15477
* SyncNeeded is requested for FE-5.

I close this bug as CLOSED NEXTRELEASE. Thanks for reviewing.