Bug 961223 (ocrfeeder)

SRPM and linked spec differ.  Which is correct?

(In reply to comment #1)
> SRPM and linked spec differ.  Which is correct?

Can you check again? I've re-uploaded them.

2c2
< Summary:            A document layout analysis and optical character recognition system
---
> Summary:            Optical Character Recognition program
35,39c35
< It generates multiple formats being its main one ODT. And it features a 
< complete GTK graphical user interface that allows the users to correct 
< any unrecognized characters, defined or correct bounding boxes, set paragraph 
< styles, clean the input images, import PDFs, save and load the project, 
< export everything to multiple formats, etc.
---
> It generates multiple formats being its main one ODT.
42a39
> autoreconf -fiv

It's really weird because I've uploaded rpmbuild -ba things.

The things like autoreconf is the second last change but it has been replaced by the latest one.

I just downloaded them and ensured that they are same now.

Are you sure?

(In reply to comment #3)

Have you downloaded the latest one?

It seems no problem now.

They match now.

! rpmlint checks return:

Clean for spec and SRPM.
RPMs:
The package should be of the noarch architecture because it doesn't contain
any binaries.

ocrfeeder.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ocrfeeder/odf/odfmanifest.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
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.

ocrfeeder.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ocrfeeder/odf/manifest.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
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.

ocrfeeder.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ocrfeeder/odf/odf2xhtml.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
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.

ocrfeeder.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ocrfeeder/odf/userfield.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
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.

ocrfeeder.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ocrfeeder/odf/element.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
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.

ocrfeeder.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ocrfeeder/odf/thumbnail.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
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.

ocrfeeder.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ocrfeeder/odf/load.py 0644L /usr/bin/python
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.

ocrfeeder.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/ocrfeeder.desktop value "0.5" for key "Version" in group "Desktop Entry" is not a known version
.desktop file is not valid, check with desktop-file-validate

ocrfeeder-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package
This debuginfo package contains no files.  This is often a sign of binaries
being unexpectedly stripped too early during the build, rpmbuild not being
able to strip the binaries, the package actually being a noarch one but
erratically packaged as arch dependent, or something else.  Verify what the
case is, and if there's no way to produce useful debuginfo out of it, disable
creation of the debuginfo package.

These should all be fixed.  debuginfo will be fixed if the package is made noarch.

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
! license listed as GPLv3, should be GPLv3+ and LGPLv2+
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing BR  ##### I'll verify this after the other things are fixed.
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file

I've CCed the author, Joaquim Rocha, which just became an employee of RH just now.

Hi Christopher,

I'll have too look into those complaints later. I have never touched the permissions of those files and, at least from Debian's packager, I received no complains. Should these be ignored? Could you test generating an ODT file to make sure it works?

If those should be ignored, is there anything else that really needs to be fixed?

About the RPM, there's a package built in OpenSuse's Service here (in case you want to take a look): https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?package=OCRFeeder&project=home%3Ajsuarezr%3AOCRFeeder


Thanks a lot for packaging it for Fedora!

Any updated on this?

I can patch it for pillow but I still want upstream to do this.

I submitted a (completely untested) patch upstream to fix the pillow incompatibility: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=712671 .

(In reply to Felix Schwarz from comment #12)
> I submitted a (completely untested) patch upstream to fix the pillow
> incompatibility: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=712671 .

I don't work on this package now because I think upstream(See comment 9) doesn't show any interests on his project now.

Christopher - if you are no longer working on this, please close it NOTABUG.

(In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #14)
> Christopher - if you are no longer working on this, please close it NOTABUG.

Don't sweat it, I will take care of my business well.

Thanks.

Any updates?

Hey folks,

I have neglected the project for a while due to several reasons, including having had a daughter, but I am now making an effort to release the next OCRFeeder's version.

The pillow bug is fixed in the introspection branch already as I commented in https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=712671 last January. I never got an answer to my comment regarding the permissions above.

Next release will be based on upstream branch "introspection".

Please let me know what is still needed for making the packaging easier.

(In reply to Joaquim Rocha from comment #17)
> Hey folks,
> 
> I have neglected the project for a while due to several reasons, including
> having had a daughter, but I am now making an effort to release the next
> OCRFeeder's version.
> 
> The pillow bug is fixed in the introspection branch already as I commented
> in https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=712671 last January. I never
> got an answer to my comment regarding the permissions above.
> 
> Next release will be based on upstream branch "introspection".
> 
> Please let me know what is still needed for making the packaging easier.

I'm waiting for 0.7.12, I don't want to package snapshot now.

When you finish the port and cleanup, ping me here again.

ocrfeeder 0.8 is out.

Is this ready for more progress?

I have released OCRFeeder 0.8.1 almost a year ago, it has the introspection branch merged. Although there are some bugs that I should tackle when I have time, I think it'd be good to have it packaged.

Submitted non-responsive.

The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 1000 days