Bug 466997
| Summary: | Review Request: sl - Joke command for when you type 'sl' instead of 'ls' | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Marc Bradshaw <fedora> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | dennis, fedora-package-review, notting, pertusus |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | mtasaka:
fedora-review+
dennis: 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: | 2008-10-28 05:06:21 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
Marc Bradshaw
2008-10-15 00:28:38 UTC
I am happy to see this package on Fedora, because this is well-known to Japanese Linux users ;) The mail transcript should be directly in the package as asource, so Source2: http://marcbradshaw.co.uk/packages/review/sl/sl-license-mail.txt would work, with cp and adding to %doc. I suggest removing the /bin/ and let the commands be searched on the path. You should use cp -p and install -p (for the manpage) to keep timestamps. Also I suggest doing something along: iconv -f iso-2022-jp README -t utf8 > README.conv README.conv && \ touch -c -r README && \ mv README.conv README Also the -f of rm is not needed, it is always the default in rpm. Forgot to say that there is a dot missing at the end of %description. Thanks Pat, I assume you mean mv -f rather than rm -f and have incorporated the suggestions into a new revision. http://marcbradshaw.co.uk/packages/review/sl/sl-3.03-4.fc9.src.rpm The timestamp of the source archive is not kept: -rw-rw-r-- 1 dumas dumas 20480 juil. 22 1999 sl.tar -rw-rw-r-- 1 dumas dumas 20480 févr. 13 2008 ../SOURCES/sl.tar Otherwise seems ok to me. Forgot one thing. In general I think that it is pretty bad to use a two letter command, since the number of two letter command names is scarce and they should be used wisely. However in that case I think that the name is not really taken since sl could just go if something serious wants the command name. Some notes for -4:
* License
- Please write explicitly from which you borrowed the license
text in the spec file (and also in sl.COPYRIGHT) as comments.
Perhaps it is from:
http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/s/sl/sl_3.03-15.diff.gz
* defattr
- We now recommend %defattr(-,root,root,-)
* manfile
- Files under %_mandir are automatically marked as %doc.
One more thing: * %dist tag - Please remove %dist tag from %changelog entry. ping? apologies, should be able to get something up this coming weekend. Sorry for the delay, been a busy week. The changes have been made to new SRPM located at... http://marcbradshaw.co.uk/packages/review/sl/sl-3.03-5.fc9.src.rpm looks good to me, final word is for Mamoru. Oops, one note:
* Man file
- Please move man.1 to %_mandir/ja/man1.
(Maybe %lang(ja) is preferable).
( This package (sl) is APPROVED by mtasaka )
(@@@)
( )
(@@@@)
( )
++ +------ ____ ____________________
|| |+-+ | | \@@@@@@@@@@@ | ___ ___ Help!__ |
/---------|(O) | | \@@@@@@@@@@@@@_ | (O) |_| \O/ |_| |
+ ======== +-+ | | | |__________________|
_|--/~\------/~\-+ |__________________| |__________________|
//// \O========O/ (O) (O) (O) (O)
Thankyou Mamoru. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: sl Short Description: Joke command for when you type 'sl' instead of 'ls' Owners: deebs Branches: F-8 F-9 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: CVS Done thanks all, imported and building. |