Bug 449927
Summary: | Review Request: imsettings - Delivery framework for general Input Method configuration | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Akira TAGOH <tagoh> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jens Petersen <petersen> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | eng-i18n-bugs, fedora-package-review, notting, petersen |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | petersen:
fedora-review+
kevin: 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: | 2008-06-16 10:06:05 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: |
Description
Akira TAGOH
2008-06-04 10:00:11 UTC
imsettings is a separate project from im-chooser now. so those packages would replaces the existing imsettings* packages. that should be no problem for the upgrading path. FYI. Thanks for the submission. Basically looks ok to me but a few things I noticed: - should BR gamin-devel I think - rpmlint output: imsettings.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/none.conf imsettings.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/xim.conf imsettings-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on imsettings - I think some requires are needed for running alternatives in %post and %postun - should it be "imsettings-reload -f" in %postun? How about writing the common text for the Description as: """ IMSettings is a framework that delivers Input Method settings and applies the changes so they take effect immediately without any need to restart applications or the desktop. """ (In reply to comment #2) > - should BR gamin-devel I think Doh. actually imsettings doesn't use gamin directly. I have to get rid of the dependency check from configure. > imsettings.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/none.conf > imsettings.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/xim.conf I'm aware of those. but I don't think it's the kind of the conffile. > imsettings-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on imsettings Because the necessary library files are in imsettings-libs. I think that could be ignored. > - I think some requires are needed for running alternatives in %post and %postun Ok. missed that. will update. > - should it be "imsettings-reload -f" in %postun? Initially it was there. but I thought it may be failed when package is removed? > I'm aware of those. but I don't think it's the kind of the conffile. Yes, I agree it can be waived. > Because the necessary library files are in imsettings-libs. I think that could > be ignored. Yep > > - should it be "imsettings-reload -f" in %postun? > > Initially it was there. but I thought it may be failed when package is removed? I mean in the version you posted %postun has: imsettings -f > /dev/null 2>&1 || : but I guess you mean imsetting-reload? Ok, revised one is: Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/imsettings/imsettings.spec SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/imsettings/imsettings-0.101.0-1.fc9.src.rpm Taking this review. Here is my review: +:ok, ?:needs attention, -:needs fixing MUST Items: [+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. See above. [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: If (and only if) 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 must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. 364c8e176bd26008c9c12f8978ed4379 imsettings-0.101.0.tar.bz2 [+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [+] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [=] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. Just wondering if the xfce subpackage should explicitly require libxfce4mcs for %{_libdir}/xfce4/mcs-plugins/, but I don't think it is a blocker given that it is already implicitly required. [+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [-] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). [+] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} See above. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. SHOULD Items: [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [?] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. I haven't been time to rebuild im-chooser yet to test this package. [+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. Updated. Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/imsettings/imsettings.spec SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/imsettings/imsettings-0.101.1-1.fc9.src.rpm For testing packages: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/imsettings/tests/i386/ Thanks. I tried the test packages and it seems to be work well. Package is APPROVED for inclusion in fedora. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: imsettings Short Description: Delivery framework for general Input Method configuration Owners: tagoh Branches: devel F-9 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes cvs done. Thanks. |