Bug 228159
| Summary: | Review Request: new-stuff-manager - program that runs in the background and downloads/installs plugins | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Sebastian Pölsterl <sebp> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | lxtnow, opensource |
| 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: | 2007-09-11 17:32:56 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: | 201449 | ||
|
Description
Sebastian Pölsterl
2007-02-10 22:47:17 UTC
Source0 should be what you have for URL: - a full url path to the source. URL should be a url to the webpage of the project or other information on the package. Thanks for the advice. I changed it and updated files are available in the same location as above. I believe that the package should own the folders, and not the content:
%{_datadir}/new-stuff-manager/*
%{_libdir}/new-stuff-manager/*
should be
%{_datadir}/new-stuff-manager
%{_libdir}/new-stuff-manager
I made the changes you requested and uploaded it again to the location above. Have you looked into these errors reported by rpmlint: [~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64] rpmlint new-stuff-manager-* E: new-stuff-manager no-binary E: new-stuff-manager only-non-binary-in-usr-lib E: new-stuff-manager-debuginfo empty-debuginfo-package W: new-stuff-manager-devel no-documentation I solved the empty-debuginfo-package problem but I don't know about the other ones. According to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Mono#head-6ac7bf1a99342dc113083232d0d61655780c6e9a rpmlint doesn't like it, but it's okay. Sebastian, were you going to supply an updated package? (You'll need to increase the Release number and provide fresh links. If you updated the package but didn't change the release then there's no way for me to tell that you did so.) New packages of new-stuff-manager 0.2.3 for Fedora 7 are available at http://www.k-d-w.org/clipboard/index.php?dir=review/ I cannot download the srpm from that page. I visited the index page, copied the URL for the srpm to clipboard and pasted it into my builder script which tries to wget the URL. Unfortunately I just get redirected to some info page. Please just post a plain link, thanks. http://www.k-d-w.org/clipboard/review/new-stuff-manager-0.2.3-1.fc7.i386.rpm http://www.k-d-w.org/clipboard/review/new-stuff-manager-0.2.3-1.fc7.src.rpm http://www.k-d-w.org/clipboard/review/new-stuff-manager-devel-0.2.3-1.fc7.i386.rpm http://www.k-d-w.org/clipboard/review/new-stuff-manager.spec Thanks. Unfortunately this fails to build for me (in mock, x86_64, rawhide); configure gets down to: checking for MONO... yes checking for gpg... no configure: error: you need to have gpg installed ! error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.16869 (%build) I can verify that gnupg2 was installed in the buildroot. Sebastian, the Fedora Account System does not know your e-mail address, therefore I assume you are not already a package maintainer in Fedora and therefore need to be sponsored. Please read: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Sebastian, ping? Okay, I completed the steps in the "Get a Fedora Account" section. Well, first fix the issue pointed out by Jason on comment 11. Although, I was able to fix the issue Jason reported I came across some other problems. I didn't have time to work on this project for quite some time. I think best is to drop this request. I request inclusion again if I'm more comfortable. Well, then please feel free to request a new review request when you have time, thank you! |