Bug 910340 (boinctui)
Summary: | Review Request: boinctui - Fullscreen text mode manager for BOINC-client | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Sergey Suslov <suleman1971> | ||||||||
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> | ||||||||
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||||||
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||||||
Priority: | unspecified | ||||||||||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | floydbarber, i, msuchy, package-review, suleman1971, technion, timothy.j.mullican, zebob.m | ||||||||
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened | ||||||||
Target Release: | --- | ||||||||||
Hardware: | All | ||||||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||||||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||||
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||||
Last Closed: | 2020-09-02 06:09:46 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: | |||||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Sergey Suslov
2013-02-12 11:37:02 UTC
Hi Sergey, This is an informal review as I cannot sponsor. I have run a koji build for you. You can see it here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5714543 Spec file: * It would be cleaner if the commented lines were removed. * The Source0 line should be a URL where a tester can download the relevant source. * Buildroot is obsolete and should be removed rpmlint produces several relevant errors: E: no-changelogname-tag Your spec file must end with a changelog, see here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Changelogs W: invalid-license GPL-3.0+ License must match the exact name here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main I believe GPLv3+ is the correct tag. W: no-url-tag Please add a url tag for your application. A number of "macro in comment" tags are related to cleaning up commented out, unused lines. W: summary-not-capitalized Starting the summary with a capital will make it look better. You can see the results of the broken source tag: ACrpmbuild -ba ./boinctui.spec error: File /home/fedora/rpmbuild/SOURCES/boinctui-2.2.1.tar.gz: No such file or directory The build process also appears to ignore the %{optflags} macro. The spec file suggests there are no documents. At a minimum, a license file is required. There should at least be some level of instructions shipped with it also. Reporter, please read Fedora guideline's carefully, don't read guideline from openSUSE, don't use OBS to build package. From license field I'm sure you haven't read licensing guideline yet. Yes, this will need some fixes and another look. * Run rpmlint (or rpmlint -I for more helpful output) on the src.rpm *and* all built rpms. Feel free to ignore obvious false positives in the report, but fix anything else. Preferably add a comment here about whether/when you think what rpmlint reports is correct or incorrect. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines Created attachment 787445 [details]
rpmlint -i ouput for src.rpm
There's a typo in the last comment. It must be "rpmlint -i …" instead of "rpmlint -I …". Here's the output of "rpmlint -i boinctui-2.2.1-0.fc19.src.rpm".
Sergey are you still interrested in this package? Any progress here? Oh, I'm so sorry. I forgot this case. Unfortunately, I migrated to Ubuntu/Debian and can't support Fedora branch now. I'm intent to close this bug. Created attachment 1600561 [details]
Updated RPM spec file
I have created an updated RPM spec file which should conform with best practices.
Created attachment 1600564 [details]
Patch to enable generation of release tar gz file
I have uploaded a new RPM spec file which should conform with best practices. I also uploaded a patch file which allows for generation of the release tar gz file. Can we get this ticket reopened? I have successfully built the new RPM with Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=36839045 Reopening. Anyone, feel free to do the review. (In reply to Timothy Mullican from comment #7) > Created attachment 1600561 [details] > Updated RPM spec file > > I have created an updated RPM spec file which should conform with best > practices. Could you open a new bug for it and mark this one as Duplicate? CC me on the bug. - Make Source0 as url %global commit 619d97fbeeb30cc5b7f58ecb9a020ca594deead5 %global shortcommit %(c=%{commit}; echo ${c:0:7}) %global snapshotdate 20190822 Source0: https://github.com/suleman1971/boinctui/archive/%{commit}/%{name}-%{shortcommit}.tar.gz […] %autosetup -n %{name}-%{commit} - Drop Source1. - Shouldn't be needed: Requires: ncurses Requires: expat Requires: openssl - make %{?_smp_mflags} is the same thing as %make_build %build autoreconf -vif %configure --without-gnutls %make_build - Don't mix $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot} %install %make_install mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1 install -m 0644 %{name}.1 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/ - Don't gzip the manpage, it is automated - Not needed: %clean rm -rf %{buildroot} - Don't use %attr(-, root, root) in %files Glob the extension of the manpage as the compression might change in the future: %files %doc changelog %license gpl-3.0.txt %{_bindir}/%{name} %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.* - Separate your changelog entry by a newline This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag. You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group. Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience. |