Bug 708663
| Summary: | Review Request: sugar-conozco_nicaragua - Geographycal Activity for Sugar | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | German Ruiz <germanrs> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | callkalpa, fedora-package-review, germanrs, james.hogarth, j, mindruv, msuchy, terje.rosten |
| 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: | 2015-12-04 02:42:55 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
German Ruiz
2011-05-28 17:54:45 UTC
New changes in ConozcoNicaragua.spec http://germanrs.fedorapeople.org/Sugar/ConozcoNicaragua-1-2.fc15.src.rpm http://germanrs.fedorapeople.org/Sugar/ConozcoNicaragua.spec - Changes in Groups and fixed the warning of mixed use of spaces and tabs [makerpm@fedora-laptop SPECS]$ rpmlint -i ConozcoNicaragua.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [makerpm@fedora-laptop SRPMS]$ rpmlint -i ConozcoNicaragua-1-2.fc15.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. New changes in ConozcoNicaragua.spec http://germanrs.fedorapeople.org/Sugar/ConozcoNicaragua-1-3.fc15.src.rpm http://germanrs.fedorapeople.org/Sugar/ConozcoNicaragua.spec - Fixed some permission files... Here is the Output of rpmlint [makerpm@fedora-laptop SPECS]$ rpmlint -i ConozcoNicaragua.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [makerpm@fedora-laptop SRPMS]$ rpmlint ConozcoNicaragua-1-3.fc15.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [makerpm@fedora-laptop noarch]$ rpmlint -i ConozcoNicaragua-1-3.fc15.noarch.rpm ConozcoNicaragua.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/sugar/activities/ConozcoNicaragua.activity/olpcgames/buildmanifest.py 0644L /usr/bin/env This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. ConozcoNicaragua.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/sugar/activities/ConozcoNicaragua.activity/setup.py 0644L /usr/bin/env This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. ConozcoNicaragua.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/sugar/activities/ConozcoNicaragua.activity/conozcouy.py 0644L /usr/bin/env This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. ConozcoNicaragua.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/sugar/activities/ConozcoNicaragua.activity/run.py 0644L /usr/bin/env This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 0 warnings. As far as I know are all sugar activities named like sugar-[activitiy name]. Why not just remove the shebangs? More details about sugar packages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SugarActivityGuidelines Updated name and changed the Group to Sugar/Activities Spec: http://germanrs.fedorapeople.org/Sugar/sugar-conozco_nicaragua.spec SRPM: http://germanrs.fedorapeople.org/Sugar/sugar-conozco_nicaragua-1-5.fc15.src.rpm It is really unfortunate that nobody has looked over this in over a year. I am a sponsor but I'm not really familiar with Sugar packaging. I will attempt to get someone who knows Sugar to take a quick look over this and give their input. In the meantime, could you confirm that you still wish to submit this package? Is the package up to date with the upstream sources? (I am far from fluent in Spanish but it appears to me that it is.) If yes to both, I will do what I can do help you out here. hi, I just went through https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/list/*sugar-**?_csrf_token=be6ba4ae734910ed44745137a6b6487d3ab48e18 and found that the name should follow the pattern sugar-conozco-nicaragua. Fore info at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Separators if you still wish to submit this package as Jason mentioned, I would like to take this and review. Kalpa, a sponsor needs to review this, though you are of course welcome to provide commentary. Jason, sure I'll comment based on German's reply Hello Jason and Kalpa, sorry for the delay, i was a little bussy this week, so the problem with Conozco Nicaragua is that just works for Nicaragua, as same like the original version Conozco Uruguay[1], for that reason i want to package this "global" version Conozco America[2], for that reason i created a new bug[3] to review this version. BTW i am new in rpm packing, but i want to learn and help to packing activities :) [1]http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Conozco_Uruguay [2]http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activities/Conozco_America [3]https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838252 PS: Sorry for my english, i am from Nicaragua... I am triaging old review tickets. I apologize that it has been so long since anyone looked at this ticket, but there are more packages submitted now than the pool of reviewers can handle, and some tickets fall through the cracks. In order to keep the queue manageable, we need to occasionally find tickets which are not reviewable so as to not waste what reviewer time is available. Accordingly, I'm pinging this ticket and setting NEEDINFO. If you are still interested in having your package reviewed, please do the following: * Make sure your package still reflects the current status of its upstream. * Check that your package still builds on current Fedora releases. * Audit your package versus the current status of the packaging guidelines, current rpmlint and current fedora-review tools. And, finally, reply, making sure that the NEEDINFO flag gets cleared so that this ticket reappears in the review queue. I can't promise a review if you reply, but by closing out the stale tickets we can devote extra attention to the ones which aren't stale. Where this package would fall in ? In case it's targeted for something newer then EPEL5 Spec file must be recompiled. > BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package BuildRoot: This is where files will be "installed" during the %install process (after the %build process). This is now redundant in Fedora and is only needed for EPEL5. By default, the build root is placed in "%{_topdir}/BUILDROOT/". same applyes for %clean section > %clean > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT VM Are you still interested in this review? Can you please provide up to date SRPM? As per policy the requester has not commented in over a month and not responded to needinfo in over a week. As such I'm closing this bug. If you are still interested in packaging please for a fresh review complying with current guidelines. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews |