Spec URL: https://bitbucket.org/dhiru/packages/raw/master/doomsday/doomsday.spec SRPM URL: https://bitbucket.org/dhiru/packages/raw/master/doomsday/doomsday-1.13.2-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: The Doomsday Engine is a greatly enhanced DOOM source port available for Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu and most other Unix platforms (source code is provided). Doomsday supports many games including the classic first-person shooters DOOM, Heretic and Hexen. Fedora Account System Username: halfie
1. # http://fedorapeople.org/~juanmabc/packages/doomsday/doomsday.spec # Juan Manuel Borges Caño is the original author of this file 404. You should point out these in changelog item. 2. %description: The Doomsday Engine is a greatly enhanced DOOM source port available for Windows, Mac OS X, Ubuntu and most other Unix platforms (source code is provided). Doomsday supports many games including the classic first-person shooters DOOM, Heretic and Hexen. Where is Fedora? Why can I only see the Crapuntu and Window$? IMO you need to improve the description, drop Windows, Mac, Ubuntu and Unix, they are completely nonsense here. 3. qmake-qt4 -r doomsday/doomsday.pro Please open your terminal and type: rpm -E %qmake_qt4 4. %post /sbin/ldconfig %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig Why don't you use %post -p /sbin/ldconfig? 5. %{_libdir}/lib*.so Where is the devel package? 6. BuildRequires: qt-devel Requires: qt Explicit requires, you add qt-devel for building, RPM will generate a dependencies list and store it in metadata, you won't need to specify this dependency again. 7. How did you find that Source0 URL? I can only find sf.net download link. 8. Where is snowberry? 9. BuildRequires: python-setuptools BuildRequires: python2-devel IMO they should be: BuildRequires: python2 And in fact snowberry requires the building via python, as pointed out in #8, I can't see it in the spec.
Updated package, Spec URL: https://bitbucket.org/dhiru/packages/raw/master/doomsday/doomsday.spec SRPM URL: https://bitbucket.org/dhiru/packages/raw/master/doomsday/doomsday-1.13.2-2.fc20.src.rpm > Where is the devel package? I only need to tackle this one now. Thanks!
(In reply to Dhiru Kholia from comment #2) > > Where is the devel package? > > I only need to tackle this one now. I know, but you should put .so into devel, it's a MUST. Requires: %name = %version Please use braces, and fulfill %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} 1.14 is available.
> Summary: DOOM/Hertic/Hexen port with pretty graphics Typo in there. I'm not really familiar with these games, but I remember the name "Heretic", and the description confirmed it, too. > I know, but you should put .so into devel, it's a MUST. No, it's not a MUST. Please point at the guidelines more often than not. About -devel package contents the guidelines are pretty good these days. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages Alternatively, give an explanation/rationale in your own words. Rule of thumb: Which package a .so file (or symlink) is to be stored in depends on how the file is used. Is it used at runtime? Then it must NOT be stored in a -devel package, because -devel packages are supposed to be fully optional. Is it used only at build-time? Then it ought to be stored in a -devel package. And remember, for any .so file somebody may argue that it would be entirely valid to treat it as a runtime file, e.g. for dlopen()ing it. Some programs do that (because they try to be compatible with multiple library ABIs), and some packagers don't agree with Fedora's guidelines for -devel package .so files.
Currently, I am not getting enough free time to move this forward. Please feel free to take over this package review request. Thanks!
This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the submitter to proceed with the review. If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take this ticket. Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket reviewer failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we reset the status and the assignee of this ticket.
(In reply to Dhiru Kholia from comment #5) > Currently, I am not getting enough free time to move this forward. > > Please feel free to take over this package review request. Thanks! Since the submitter has indicates they have no time to continue, I close this review request.