Bug 204852
Summary: | Review Request: tuxpaint-stamps - Extra stamp files for tuxpaint | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Steven Pritchard <steve> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Kevin Fenzi <kevin> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | panemade, wart |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-09-14 15:42:03 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: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Steven Pritchard
2006-08-31 21:21:12 UTC
{Not Official Review} packaging looks ok. + Mockbuild is successfull for i386 FC6 - rpmlint on binary rpm is NOT silent E: tuxpaint-stamps incorrect-locale-sv /usr/share/locale/sw/LC_MESSAGES/tuxpaint-stamps.mo + dist tag is present + Buildroot is correct + source URL is correct + BR is correct + License used is GPL + License file COPYING is included + MD5 sum on tarball is matching upstream tarball 6edf92504b1b9f9943e3b28011738691 tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25.tar.gz + No duplicate files (In reply to comment #1) > - rpmlint on binary rpm is NOT silent > E: tuxpaint-stamps incorrect-locale-sv > /usr/share/locale/sw/LC_MESSAGES/tuxpaint-stamps.mo Sorry, I meant to mention this when I submitted the package. I think this is a bogus error, but either way I don't know how to fix it. More information here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-games-list/2006-August/msg00034.html OK - Package name OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (GPL) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 6edf92504b1b9f9943e3b28011738691 tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25.tar.gz 6edf92504b1b9f9943e3b28011738691 tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25.tar.gz.1 OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. See below - No rpmlint output. SHOULD Items: OK - Should include License or ask upstream to include it. OK - Should build in mock. Issues: 1. The rpmlint error: E: tuxpaint-stamps incorrect-locale-sv /usr/share/locale/sw/LC_MESSAGES/ tuxpaint-stamps.mo seems to be saying that sw is a invalid locale, and should be sv? From the I18NCheck.py file in rpmlint: # Associative array of invalid value => correct value INCORRECT_LOCALES = { 'in': 'id', 'in_ID': 'id_ID', 'iw': 'he', 'iw_IL': 'he_IL', 'gr': 'el', 'gr_GR': 'el_GR', 'cz': 'cs', 'cz_CZ': 'cs_CZ', 'sw': 'sv', 'lug': 'lg', # 'lug' is valid, but we standardize on 2 letter codes 'en_UK': 'en_GB'} So perhaps move the sw locale files to the sv directory? I think sw is not a valid locale, so those files should be sv files. I see tuxpaint itself does this as well, perhaps a bug should be filed against it? Thats the only issue I see here. Looking at the locale thing further, it looks like it is a bogus error. The file is a sw file, but rpmlint doesn't see that as a valid locale. That I18NCheck.py file was last modified more than 6 years ago, so it could be very out of date. It might be worth posting to the extras list to see if anyone has further ideas on it, but I'll go ahead and APPROVE this package now. Thanks. I finally got this imported into CVS. I just posted something to fedora-extras-list, but now I'm positive the error is bogus. That file is Swahili, and sw seems to be the correct locale for Swahili. (That last note was delayed thanks to my Internet connection going down last night.) Paul Howarth has reported the rpmlint issue upstream (http://rpmlint.zarb.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/ticket/49). It's definitely a bug. The FC-5 branch has been created, and a build is in progress. |