Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Review Request: accerciser - An interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Ben Konrath <ben>|
|Component:||Package Review||Assignee:||Matthias Clasen <mclasen>|
|Status:||CLOSED DUPLICATE||QA Contact:||Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>|
|Version:||rawhide||CC:||fedora-package-review, jjardon, kalevlember, mclasen, notting|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2010-11-02 10:09:06 EDT||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Ben Konrath 2009-12-11 15:16:40 EST
Spec URL: http://bagu.org/scratch/accerciser.spec SRPM URL: http://bagu.org/scratch/accerciser-1.9.3-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: Accerciser is an interactive Python accessibility explorer for the GNOME desktop. It uses AT-SPI to inspect and control widgets, allowing you to check if an application is providing correct information to assistive technologies and automated test frameworks.
Comment 1 Matthias Clasen 2010-05-29 19:35:43 EDT
Builds fine in mock. rpmlint says: accerciser.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency libgail-gnome accerciser.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US assistive -> assistance, assisted, assistant accerciser.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/accerciser/plugins/ipython_view.py 0644L /usr/bin/python accerciser.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/accerciser.schemas accerciser.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US assistive -> assistance, assisted, assistant 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings.
Comment 2 Matthias Clasen 2010-05-29 19:58:47 EDT
In the rpmlint output, the non-executable-script warning should probably be fixed by removing the shebang line from the plugin.
Comment 3 Matthias Clasen 2010-05-29 20:19:49 EDT
package name: ok spec file name: ok packaging guidelines: - the rm -rf at the top of %install is no longer necessary - %clean is no longer necessary - the handling of the icon cache should be updated to follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache - the desktop file has no MimeType entry, so the update-desktop-database call is unnecessary license: ok license field: ok license file: ok spec file language: ok spec file readability: ok upstream sources: ok buildable: ok excludearch: ok buildrequires: ok locale handling: ok ldconfig: ok system libraries: ok relocatable: ok directory ownership: ok duplicate files: ok permissions: ok macro use: ok permissable content: ok large docs: ok %doc content: ok headers: ok static libs: ok shared libs: ok devel package: ok libtool archives: ok gui app: - need to call desktop-file-validate on the installed desktop file directory ownership: ok utf8 filenames: ok
Comment 4 Ben Konrath 2010-10-30 11:10:39 EDT
I no longer have time to maintain the accerciser package. Does somebody want to take over the package review? I would like to remove the spec file and sprm from my server. Is there a place I can put these files to in case somebody wants to take over this review sometime in the future? Thanks, Ben
Comment 5 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-01 18:53:59 EDT
You can put files on your fedorapeople account if you have one, or you could attach the spec file to this ticket. There don't seem to be any patches so it should be sufficient to recreate the package.
Comment 6 Ben Konrath 2010-11-02 03:32:24 EDT
I copied the files from the initial post to my fedorapeople page: http://fedorapeople.org/~bkonrath/accerciser-1.9.3-1.fc12.src.rpm http://fedorapeople.org/~bkonrath/accerciser.spec Should I keep this bug open even though I'm not planning to continue the review or should should I close it? Thanks, Ben
Comment 7 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-02 10:09:06 EDT
I'll close it out for you. The ticket will of course stay around and be easy to find from the search box http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/ among other places, should someone want to pick it back up in the future.