Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||Review Request: mate-common -- mate common build files|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||Dan Mashal <dan.mashal>|
|Component:||mate-common||Assignee:||Dan Mashal <dan.mashal>|
|Status:||CLOSED ERRATA||QA Contact:||Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>|
|Version:||rawhide||CC:||chat-to-me, dan.mashal, mrunge, nmo.marques, notting, package-review, rdieter, sanjay.ankur|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2012-07-19 05:09:35 EDT||Type:||Bug|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
Description Dan Mashal 2012-07-12 23:25:42 EDT
Spec URL: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/mate-common.spec SRPM URL: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/mate-common-1.4.0-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: BitchX: MATE dekstop engine
Comment 1 Dan Mashal 2012-07-12 23:27:40 EDT
oops minus the BitchX sorry, about that.. copy pasting.
Comment 2 Rex Dieter 2012-07-12 23:30:09 EDT
I believe you're already sponsored... :) removing FE-NEEDSPONSOR, and adjusting summary to match pkg %name and %summary
Comment 3 Dan Mashal 2012-07-12 23:30:57 EDT
Thank you Rex. Care to do the review? ;)
Comment 4 Rex Dieter 2012-07-12 23:32:02 EDT
initial commments: no need to BuildRequires: gcc otherwise, the BuildRequires: are quite sparse, really, nothing? and, using a /usr/local prefix here is (probably) not acceptable, and try to use the default /usr prefix and %configure macro
Comment 5 Dan Mashal 2012-07-12 23:41:07 EDT
mate-common is the first basic component of mate so all that's required is python auto make and gcc really. I can do fresh reinstall of fedora to double check but I just did that. As for configure mate uses autogen.sh and does not come with a configure script. Usr directory noted.
Comment 6 Dan Mashal 2012-07-13 09:04:40 EDT
All 21 RPMs are built. Will upload to fedora people and polish spec files for you within 24 hours sir. Thanks for your help.
Comment 7 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2012-07-13 09:19:41 EDT
(In reply to comment #5) > mate-common is the first basic component of mate so all that's required is > python auto make and gcc really. I can do fresh reinstall of fedora to > double check but I just did that. As for configure mate uses autogen.sh and > does not come with a configure script. Usr directory noted. Dan, You can just use mock or fire scratch builds at koji now that you're a packager. They use clean build environments and help in catching build requires. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_Mock_to_test_package_builds Since MATE is a big collection of packages and would require quite a few reviews, is it worth making a tracker bug for it that would help track the reviews for its components? I'll help with the reviewing when I find free cycles. Thanks, Ankur
Comment 8 Rex Dieter 2012-07-13 09:36:35 EDT
so, here's some suggested fixes: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/mate/ %changelog * Fri Jul 13 2012 Rex Dieter <email@example.com> 1.4.0-2 - omit Group: tag - fix URL, Source0 - use %%configure macro - BuildArch: noarch the stuff about urls, and %configure macro usage you ought to adopt in your other mate-related pkgs too. and scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4238369
Comment 9 Nelson Marques 2012-07-13 10:25:13 EDT
Anyone against that I help with this review ?
Comment 10 Dan Mashal 2012-07-13 10:34:35 EDT
Hi, All RPMs, SRPMs and SPEC files have been built and are uploaded here: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/ Please review. This will need legal review as well. It was brought to my attention "nyan cat" is copyrighted. Thanks, Dan
Comment 11 Mario Blättermann 2012-07-13 17:42:02 EDT
(In reply to comment #7) > Since MATE is a big collection of packages and would require quite a few > reviews, is it worth making a tracker bug for it that would help track the > reviews for its components? Done. Tracker is bug #840149.
Comment 12 Dan Mashal 2012-07-13 18:00:13 EDT
Thank you Rex and Mario. Rex, I will work with your suggestions this weekend. Mario, thanks for creating the tracker.
Comment 13 Nelson Marques 2012-07-14 11:25:03 EDT
Hi all, I've looked around and it seems that nyan cat is indeed copyrighted and there's currently 3 copyright holders: 1) 1 copyright holder for the animated gif; 2) 1 copyright holder for the music; 3) 1 copyright holder for the video; I've taken the liberty of opening a bug report upstream requesting for this issue to be cleared out; I will talk to Stefano and Perberos about this once I grab them online. Upstream: https://github.com/perberos/Mate-Desktop-Environment/issues/104
Comment 14 Nelson Marques 2012-07-14 16:18:14 EDT
Aditional Information: You can disable 'nyan cat' during build time if you want, you need to add this option to %configure (which you are neglecting currently): %build %configure --disable-nyancat And that should get rid of nyancat.
Comment 15 Nelson Marques 2012-07-14 16:27:32 EDT
Dan, I've found that also another person has a few very neat packages for Fedora; You can use them to improve your specs if you want or even contact the original author, tell him about your effort and maybe you guys can do this together. Take a look at this: https://github.com/mate-desktop/fedora-packages
Comment 16 Dan Mashal 2012-07-14 20:32:28 EDT
Nelson, Thanks for the Nyan cat comment. Regarding those packages, they are out of date and heavily patched. I have been working with Nice&Gently. He is on vacation right now. Thanks, Dan
Comment 17 Tom "spot" Callaway 2012-07-15 14:53:30 EDT
We probably cannot distribute "nyan cat" in source format either, without permission from the copyright holder. I have not looked at the source code at all, however, if only the image of "pop tart cat" is being used here, you may wish you ask the copyright holder (prguitarman <firstname.lastname@example.org>) for permission. The alternative would be to simply remove the "nyan cat" content from the source tarball entirely and make a "clean" tarball.
Comment 18 Dan Mashal 2012-07-16 02:42:27 EDT
Thanks spot. Update spec and srpm here: spec: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/matespace/mate-common.spec srpm: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/materpms/srpms/mate/mate-common-1.4.0-3.src.rpm
Comment 19 Dan Mashal 2012-07-16 02:43:32 EDT
Comment 20 Dan Mashal 2012-07-16 02:45:24 EDT
one more try for srpm link: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/materpms/srpms/mate-common-1.4.0-3.src.rpm Sorry.
Comment 21 Dan Mashal 2012-07-16 18:39:07 EDT
Hi Rex, Per our conversation on IRC I have updated the SPEC and SRPM. Please review it. Once mate-common gets approved I can make mate-common a requirement for every other spec. We will also track any legality issues in the main tracker bug. Spec URL: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/matespec/mate-common.spec SRPM: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/materpms/srpms/mate-common-1.4.0-4.fc17.src.rpm Description: base files for building and installing MATE Desktop
Comment 22 Rex Dieter 2012-07-16 19:04:45 EDT
So, I just looked closer at the gnome-common analog, http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=gnome-common.git;a=blob;f=gnome-common.spec and see some things we could... borrow here. :) stuff like: runtime requires better summary/description so, 1. MUST: add runtime deps Requires: automake autoconf libtool gettext pkgconfig 2. SHOULD: improve pkg summary/description as suggested 3. MUST: Licensing: so, .spec says GPLv2+, and none of the included files mention licensing, except for the embedded COPYING file, which is GPLv3. can you verify with upstream (if you haven't already), their intent here? (I'm assuming some GPLv2+ (with some/all libs LGPLv2+) combo like pre-forked gnome2...) naming: ok macros: ok scriptlets: n/a sources: ok $ md5sum *.xz bc49ff6897ef2303c6464a3ca46aaf35 mate-common-1.4.0.tar.xz
Comment 23 Dan Mashal 2012-07-16 19:48:52 EDT
Updated license. It is GPLv3+. I will do the license review on a package by package basis. Most everything is GPLv2+, GPLv3(+), lGPL as per perberos. Added gnome-common to requires field. Spec URL: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/matespec/mate-common.spec SRPM: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/materpms/srpms/mate-common-1.4.0-5.fc17.src.rpm
Comment 24 Rex Dieter 2012-07-16 21:51:53 EDT
OK, looks good, APPROVED. curious why you added Requires: gnome-common though. ??
Comment 25 Dan Mashal 2012-07-16 21:54:10 EDT
My mistake, misunderstood. I'll remove that. Thanks!
Comment 26 Dan Mashal 2012-07-16 22:15:32 EDT
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: mate-common Short Description: binaries for building all MATE desktop sub components Owners: vicodan rdieter Branches: f16 f17 InitialCC: vicodan rdieter
Comment 27 Jon Ciesla 2012-07-17 23:24:11 EDT
Git done (by process-git-requests).
Comment 28 Fedora Update System 2012-07-18 01:22:28 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mate-common-1.4.0-4.fc16
Comment 29 Fedora Update System 2012-07-18 01:22:37 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-4.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mate-common-1.4.0-4.fc17
Comment 30 Dan Mashal 2012-07-18 01:23:57 EDT
Comment 31 Fedora Update System 2012-07-18 02:45:28 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-5.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mate-common-1.4.0-5.fc17
Comment 32 Fedora Update System 2012-07-18 02:45:39 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-5.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mate-common-1.4.0-5.fc16
Comment 33 Fedora Update System 2012-07-19 05:09:35 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-5.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.
Comment 34 Fedora Update System 2012-07-19 05:14:26 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-5.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
Comment 35 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2012-07-19 09:44:13 EDT
A little correction from me. BuildRequires: automake BuildRequires: autoconf Requires: automake Requires: autoconf Requires: libtool Requires: gettext Requires: pkgconfig because for building you need only automake and autoconf but for a working package after installation we need all the requires.
Comment 36 Rex Dieter 2012-07-19 09:48:33 EDT
Oops indeed, missed my MUST item 1 above about adding the Requires:
Comment 37 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2012-07-24 18:29:07 EDT
Can you update the requires like in my comment 35 and release an update? Otherwise you have to add the missing Requires to every other package which need them. The sense of mate-common is this not to do for every other package.
Comment 38 Dan Mashal 2012-07-24 18:33:21 EDT
Comment 39 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2012-07-24 18:38:16 EDT
I give you a example: building libmatekeyring with fedora's mate-common DEBUG: + cd libmatekeyring-1.4.0 DEBUG: + /bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w . DEBUG: + NOCONFIGURE=1 DEBUG: + ./autogen.sh DEBUG: /usr/bin/mate-autogen DEBUG: checking for autoconf >= 2.53... DEBUG: testing autoconf2.50... not found. DEBUG: testing autoconf... found 2.68 DEBUG: checking for automake >= 1.9... DEBUG: testing automake-1.12... not found. DEBUG: testing automake-1.11... found 1.11.1 DEBUG: checking for libtool >= 1.4.3... DEBUG: testing libtoolize... not found. DEBUG: ***Error***: You must have libtool >= 1.4.3 installed This is why Requires: libtool is missing in mate-common Pls update
Comment 40 Fedora Update System 2012-07-24 21:15:27 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-6.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mate-common-1.4.0-6.fc17
Comment 41 Fedora Update System 2012-07-24 21:15:33 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-6.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mate-common-1.4.0-6.fc16
Comment 42 Dan Mashal 2012-07-24 21:16:11 EDT
Done. Please test and leave karma.
Comment 43 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2012-07-24 21:40:17 EDT
yeap, it works. no need to to add BuildRequires: libtool for libmatekeyring I will leave positiv karma. thx Dan
Comment 44 Fedora Update System 2012-08-02 17:38:53 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-8.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mate-common-1.4.0-8.fc17
Comment 45 Fedora Update System 2012-08-02 17:39:04 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-8.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mate-common-1.4.0-8.fc16
Comment 46 Fedora Update System 2012-08-03 07:28:03 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-8.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 47 Fedora Update System 2012-08-03 07:30:09 EDT
mate-common-1.4.0-8.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 48 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2012-08-03 07:48:27 EDT
Dan, pls give me a favor. Change Requires like in version 1.4.0-6 We need pkgconfig here, and we don't need intltool glib2-devel gtk-doc for every other mate application. Do it like this. BuildRequires: automake autoconf Requires: automake autoconf libtool gettext pkgconfig
Comment 49 Matthias Runge 2012-08-03 07:58:40 EDT
uhm, you're requiring automake autoconf libtool and pkgconfig at runtime, and not during build? Really? Taken from here: http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/matespec/mate-common.spec
Comment 50 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2012-08-03 08:37:52 EDT
(In reply to comment #49) > uhm, > you're requiring automake autoconf libtool and pkgconfig at runtime, and not > during build? Really? > > Taken from here: > http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/matespec/mate-common.spec This is the sense of mate-common, adding some main requries for building mate packages. Otherwise we have to add automake autoconf libtool gettext and pkgconfig as BuildRquires in every other package.
Comment 51 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2012-08-03 08:42:47 EDT
(In reply to comment #50) > (In reply to comment #49) > > uhm, > > you're requiring automake autoconf libtool and pkgconfig at runtime, and not > > during build? Really? > > > > Taken from here: > > http://vicodan.fedorapeople.org/matespec/mate-common.spec > > This is the sense of mate-common, adding some main requries for building > mate packages. > Otherwise we have to add automake autoconf libtool gettext and pkgconfig as > BuildRquires in every other package. For running ./autogen.sh for building configure and make files of mate packages, you need this requires.
Comment 52 Matthias Runge 2012-08-03 09:04:47 EDT
Thank you for your explanation. I absolutely understand, why requirements are necessary. The difference between BuildRequirements and Requirements is, that you need BuildRequire during build, requirements are not needed for build, but during runtime. Sadly, this didn't answer, why automake autoconf etc. are not required during build time, but for runtime.
Comment 53 Wolfgang Ulbrich 2012-08-03 09:25:12 EDT
(In reply to comment #52) > Thank you for your explanation. > > I absolutely understand, why requirements are necessary. > > The difference between BuildRequirements and Requirements is, that you need > BuildRequire during build, requirements are not needed for build, but during > runtime. > > Sadly, this didn't answer, why automake autoconf etc. are not required > during build time, but for runtime. ??? If i follow your link was given in comment 49, i see BuildRequires: automake autoconf
Comment 54 Matthias Runge 2012-08-03 13:17:57 EDT
> ??? > If i follow your link was given in comment 49, > i see > BuildRequires: automake autoconf from the link: BuildRequires: automake autoconf Requires: automake autoconf libtool gettext pkgconfig So: why automake autoconf libtool gettext pkgconfig are required at runtime opposed to build time?
Comment 55 Dan Mashal 2012-08-03 16:27:03 EDT
These are required at run time because mate-common provides mate-autogen which requires those at run time.
Comment 56 Matthias Runge 2012-08-06 03:24:55 EDT
OK, I was mislead by the name of the package. It is required only for compiling other mate packages and not required at mate run-time, right? If yes, it probably should be named mate-devel, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages: Fedora packages must be designed with a logical separation of files. Specifically, -devel packages must be used to contain files which are intended solely for development or needed only at build-time.
Comment 57 Dan Mashal 2012-08-06 03:26:19 EDT
That is correct. I will have to take this up with upstream, however in its current state it makes building the dependant packages a lot simpler.
Comment 58 Rex Dieter 2012-08-06 12:29:30 EDT
fyi, It's perfectly ok for some build-time/devel type packages to not be named -devel. There are many such examples, mate-common and gnome-common being 2 of them (others include: automake, autoconf, libtool, gcc, cmake)
Comment 59 Matthias Runge 2012-08-06 14:37:51 EDT
(In reply to comment #58) > fyi, It's perfectly ok for some build-time/devel type packages to not be > named -devel. There are many such examples, mate-common and gnome-common > being 2 of them (others include: automake, autoconf, libtool, gcc, cmake) OK; I didn't knew that. Thank you for clarification.