Bug 568315

He he, it would be wrong to ship this as executable[1]:

  This source code is published as reference documents only. This is an overview
  of the code used to run various system admin functions by me (K S Braunsdorf).
  It doesn't represent anything useful.

  In fact it might be bad. I wouldn't recommend that you download it or run any
  part of it. Just read it.


:-)


[1]: ftp://ftp.physics.purdue.edu/pub/pundits/index.html

NetBSD ships it, FreeBSD ships it.
I understand that disclaimers may be scary - and the code itself is also scary - but it's actually useful. I know people who actually use it.

Sure, it was joke, Open Source is so serious and boring these days :-)

Ok, back to business. 

I wonder if you should create separate packages for mkcmd and msrc0?

They are hardly used for anything besides building this one.
Actually, I was hoping for a long time that someone will be inspired by this utility and will actually rewrite it using slightly more modern approach to argument parsing etc. And I still hope that at some point it can be replaced with something commandline-compatible but much less ugly.
That's why it might make sense to keep the infestation contained.

I finally understood how to use the tool and it was in fact clever, thanks.

? rpmlint
 xapply-debuginfo.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/src/debug/xapply-3.4/x
 apply-3.4/bin/xapply/xapply.m mkcmd
 xapply-debuginfo.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/src/debug/xapply-3.4/xapply-3.4/bin/xapply/xapply.m 0644 mkcmd
 Can be ignored?
ok naming of package and spec
! spec file
 use version macro in Source0 and %prep
 add some comments in %build, a (future) new maintainer will be very
 confused about that mess.
 more explicit here please:
 %{_mandir}/man1/*
 add some of the README/TODO files to %doc
! license approved and tag correct
 I can't find any thing about license, where did you get BSD from? 
ok license in %doc
ok correct language
ok sha1sum on sources and ok url
  3e5a6a01c7fc1c27b1ec68fd607563ba0400f3cb  xapply-3.4.tgz
  3e5a6a01c7fc1c27b1ec68fd607563ba0400f3cb  xapply-3.4.tgz.spec
  ef87e01d407b8e1919fe0099bb53a8bca5475bec  msrc0-0.7.tgz
  ef87e01d407b8e1919fe0099bb53a8bca5475bec  msrc0-0.7.tgz.spec
  33342afc845db84a040f116202b880d37b9f626f  mkcmd-8.14.tgz
  33342afc845db84a040f116202b880d37b9f626f  mkcmd-8.14.tgz.spec
ok koji build with correct buildreq
 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2158029
ok excludearch
 - locale files
 - ldconfig
ok no bundling
ok owns, dirs and perms and only once
ok macros
ok code or content
 - large docs
ok %doc not affect the runtime
 - headers|static in devel|static
 - .so in devel
 - devel dep on base
 - no .la|.a file
 - gui with desktop file
ok own just not owned
ok utf-8 file names

ok trans
ok testing
 - scriptlets sane
 - subpkgs dep on base
 - pkgconfig(.pc) in devel
 - req on package not on files
ok add man pages

Please have a look at the ! stuff above.

ping?

Sorry.
Expect an update this week :)

ping?

Very sorry for the delay. Will try to send an update this week for real.

:-)

Sorry for the delay, finally some progress.
I reuploaded the sources to http://stingray.fedorapeople.org/review/xapply/

What has been changed?  

I really need some feedback on the license issue.

BTW: I can't access the ftp site any longer. Is there any alternative download site?

A year without feedback, closing ticket and adding dead review blocker.

Reopen if anyone wants to to continue.

This bug almost made me laugh :)