Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/smuxi/smuxi.spec SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/smuxi/smuxi-0.11-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Smuxi is an open-source, powerful, flexible, and user-friendly chat client created by Mirco Bauer and developed by other contributors. Inspired by the combination of screen and irssi, Smuxi has a detachable server (or like a "normal" client) that stays connected when you aren't, and can allow multiple Smuxi front-ends (like the GNOME front-end, or STFL text-based front-end) to be connected and in sync. This is similar to screen+irssi or IRC bouncers, but more elegant and powerful. Fedora Account System Username: sagitter
*** Bug 1033413 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Thanks for doing this, I actually wanted to leave a reply at the original bug, but I was taking exams. It'd be better to see my original spec as well, although I still manage to restore it from my SSD. Just a note, I don't want to see a SUSE style package, I know this has been pushed to SUSE repo, but I think there are too many subpackages. Thanks!
Here is the origin: http://awk.io/smuxi.spec
will you take the spec file from Christopher, and update it ?
(In reply to MartinKG from comment #4) > will you take the spec file from Christopher, and update it ? No. We can start from mine.
a quick review. 1. rpmlint smuxi-0.11-1.fc21.src.rpm smuxi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, sir smuxi.src:73: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib smuxi.src:110: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name} smuxi.src:111: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend-gnome.exe* smuxi.src:112: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend.dll* smuxi.src:113: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend-gnome-irc.dll* smuxi.src:114: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend-gnome-twitter.dll* smuxi.src:115: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend-gnome-xmpp.dll* smuxi.src:116: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-server.exe* smuxi.src:127: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Db4objects.Db4o.dll* smuxi.src:128: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine.dll* smuxi.src:129: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-common.dll* smuxi.src:130: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-campfire.dll* smuxi.src:131: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/ServiceStack.*.dll* smuxi.src:132: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-irc.dll* smuxi.src:133: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Meebey.SmartIrc4net.dll* smuxi.src:134: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-jabbr.dll* smuxi.src:135: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/JabbR.Client.dll* smuxi.src:136: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR.Client.dll* smuxi.src:137: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-twitter.dll* smuxi.src:138: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Newtonsoft.Json.dll* smuxi.src:139: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Twitterizer2.dll* smuxi.src:140: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-xmpp.dll* smuxi.src:141: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/agsxmpp.dll* smuxi.src:142: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/StarkSoftProxy.dll* smuxi.src:146: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/smuxi/smuxi-frontend-stfl.exe smuxi.src:147: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/smuxi/smuxi-frontend-stfl.exe.config smuxi.src:153: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/smuxi-common.pc smuxi.src:154: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/smuxi-engine-irc.pc smuxi.src:155: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/smuxi-engine.pc smuxi.src:156: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/smuxi-frontend.pc 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 30 errors, 1 warnings. A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib, /usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}. Solution:- Don't hardcode path in SPEC rather use macros. 2. the source package contains various types of License and must be corrected. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "LGPL (v2.1 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD", "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2.1 or later)". 1798 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
> It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}. Don't forget that this is based on Mono: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Mono#File_Locations
I'm doing an informal review. So whoever does the actual review please let me know whatever i did wrong. I used fedora-review to generate the report and made some manual checks. This is a review *template*. Besides handling the [ ]-marked tests you are also supposed to fix the template before pasting into bugzilla: - Add issues you find to the list of issues on top. If there isn't such a list, create one. - Add your own remarks to the template checks. - Add new lines marked [!] or [?] when you discover new things not listed by fedora-review. - Change or remove any text in the template which is plain wrong. In this case you could also file a bug against fedora-review - Remove the "[ ] Manual check required", you will not have any such lines in what you paste. - Remove attachments which you deem not really useful (the rpmlint ones are mandatory, though) - Remove this text Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. Note: Cannot find LICENSE in rpm(s) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "LGPL (v2.1 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD", "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2.1 or later)". 1798 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/martin/rpmbuild/SPECS/1177926-smuxi/licensecheck.txt [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [?]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16, /usr/lib/pkgconfig, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256, /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/lib/smuxi, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: The spec file handles locales properly. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [-]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in smuxi [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 8 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in smuxi- engine , smuxi-frontend-stfl , smuxi-devel [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Note: %define requiring justification: %define debug_package %{nil} [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [ ]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 1382400 bytes in /usr/share [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: smuxi-0.11-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm smuxi-engine-0.11-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm smuxi-frontend-stfl-0.11-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm smuxi-devel-0.11-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm smuxi-0.11-1.fc22.src.rpm smuxi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, sir smuxi.x86_64: E: no-binary smuxi.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib smuxi-engine.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, sir smuxi-engine.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib smuxi-engine.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/smuxi-engine/LICENSE smuxi-frontend-stfl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, sir smuxi-frontend-stfl.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib smuxi-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) pc -> PC, p, c smuxi-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, sir smuxi-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pc -> PC, p, c smuxi-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/smuxi-devel/LICENSE smuxi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, sir smuxi.src:73: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib smuxi.src:110: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name} smuxi.src:111: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend-gnome.exe* smuxi.src:112: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend.dll* smuxi.src:113: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend-gnome-irc.dll* smuxi.src:114: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend-gnome-twitter.dll* smuxi.src:115: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-frontend-gnome-xmpp.dll* smuxi.src:116: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-server.exe* smuxi.src:127: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Db4objects.Db4o.dll* smuxi.src:128: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine.dll* smuxi.src:129: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-common.dll* smuxi.src:130: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-campfire.dll* smuxi.src:131: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/ServiceStack.*.dll* smuxi.src:132: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-irc.dll* smuxi.src:133: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Meebey.SmartIrc4net.dll* smuxi.src:134: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-jabbr.dll* smuxi.src:135: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/JabbR.Client.dll* smuxi.src:136: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR.Client.dll* smuxi.src:137: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-twitter.dll* smuxi.src:138: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Newtonsoft.Json.dll* smuxi.src:139: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/Twitterizer2.dll* smuxi.src:140: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/%{name}-engine-xmpp.dll* smuxi.src:141: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/agsxmpp.dll* smuxi.src:142: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name}/StarkSoftProxy.dll* smuxi.src:146: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/smuxi/smuxi-frontend-stfl.exe smuxi.src:147: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/smuxi/smuxi-frontend-stfl.exe.config smuxi.src:153: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/smuxi-common.pc smuxi.src:154: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/smuxi-engine-irc.pc smuxi.src:155: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/smuxi-engine.pc smuxi.src:156: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/smuxi-frontend.pc 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 33 errors, 10 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ^[]0;<mock-chroot>^G<mock-chroot>[root@fc21 /]# rpmlint smuxi-devel smuxi smuxi-frontend-stfl smuxi-engine smuxi-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) pc -> PC, p, c smuxi-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, Sir smuxi-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pc -> PC, p, c smuxi-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/smuxi-devel/LICENSE smuxi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, Sir smuxi.x86_64: E: no-binary smuxi.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib smuxi-frontend-stfl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, Sir smuxi-frontend-stfl.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib smuxi-engine.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US irssi -> IRS, RSI, Sir smuxi-engine.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib smuxi-engine.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/smuxi-engine/LICENSE 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 9 warnings. ^[]0;<mock-chroot>^G<mock-chroot>[root@fc21 /]# echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- smuxi-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): smuxi (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh mono(Mono.Posix) mono(System) mono(System.Core) mono(System.Runtime.Remoting) mono(System.Web) mono(dbus-sharp) mono(dbus-sharp-glib) mono(gdk-sharp) mono(glade-sharp) mono(glib-sharp) mono(gtk-sharp) mono(log4net) mono(mscorlib) mono(notify-sharp) mono(pango-sharp) mono(smuxi-common) mono(smuxi-engine) mono(smuxi-engine-irc) mono(smuxi-engine-twitter) mono(smuxi-engine-xmpp) mono(smuxi-frontend) mono(smuxi-frontend-gnome) smuxi-engine(x86-64) smuxi-frontend-stfl (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh mono(Mono.Posix) mono(System) mono(System.Core) mono(log4net) mono(mscorlib) mono(smuxi-common) mono(smuxi-engine) mono(smuxi-frontend) smuxi-engine(x86-64) smuxi-engine (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): mono(Db4objects.Db4o) mono(JabbR.Client) mono(Meebey.SmartIrc4net) mono(Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR.Client) mono(Mono.Posix) mono(Newtonsoft.Json) mono(ServiceStack.Common) mono(ServiceStack.Interfaces) mono(ServiceStack.Text) mono(StarkSoftProxy) mono(System) mono(System.Core) mono(System.Data) mono(System.Data.Linq) mono(System.Drawing) mono(System.Runtime.Serialization) mono(System.Web) mono(System.Xml) mono(System.Xml.Linq) mono(Twitterizer2) mono(agsxmpp) mono(log4net) mono(mscorlib) mono(nini) mono(smuxi-common) mono(smuxi-engine) Provides -------- smuxi-devel: smuxi-devel smuxi-devel(x86-64) smuxi: application() application(smuxi-frontend-gnome.desktop) mono(smuxi-frontend) mono(smuxi-frontend-gnome) mono(smuxi-frontend-gnome-irc) mono(smuxi-frontend-gnome-twitter) mono(smuxi-frontend-gnome-xmpp) mono(smuxi-server) smuxi smuxi(x86-64) smuxi-frontend-stfl: mono(smuxi-frontend-stfl) smuxi-frontend-stfl smuxi-frontend-stfl(x86-64) smuxi-engine: mono(Db4objects.Db4o) mono(JabbR.Client) mono(Meebey.SmartIrc4net) mono(Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR.Client) mono(Newtonsoft.Json) mono(ServiceStack.Common) mono(ServiceStack.Interfaces) mono(ServiceStack.Text) mono(StarkSoftProxy) mono(Twitterizer2) mono(agsxmpp) mono(smuxi-common) mono(smuxi-engine) mono(smuxi-engine-campfire) mono(smuxi-engine-irc) mono(smuxi-engine-jabbr) mono(smuxi-engine-twitter) mono(smuxi-engine-xmpp) smuxi-engine smuxi-engine(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- https://smuxi.im/jaws/data/files/smuxi-0.11.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 08797bb6d09b3c97cebaf63935a02525b41d12cee09d21e79775283a9286f5b2 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 08797bb6d09b3c97cebaf63935a02525b41d12cee09d21e79775283a9286f5b2 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1177926 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/smuxi/smuxi.spec SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/smuxi/smuxi-0.11-2.fc21.src.rpm Fixed licenses.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. Note: Cannot find APACHE-LICENSE-2.0.txt in rpm(s) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "LGPL (v2.1 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD", "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2.1 or later)". 1798 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/martin/rpmbuild/SPECS/1177926-smuxi/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16, /usr/lib/pkgconfig, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256, /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/lib/smuxi, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: The spec file handles locales properly. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [-]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in smuxi [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 8 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local I found no critical issues, package approved.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: smuxi Short Description: Powerful, flexible, user-friendly chat client Upstream URL: https://smuxi.im Owners: sagitter Branches: f21 f20
Please add me as a co maintainer, thanks.
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #12) > Please add me as a co maintainer, thanks. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: smuxi Short Description: Powerful, flexible, user-friendly chat client Upstream URL: https://smuxi.im Owners: sagitter cicku Branches: f21 f20
Git done (by process-git-requests).
The current package split is problematic. It doesn't allow a console frontend only install without installing X11/GNOME packages. Also a smuxi-server only install without X11/GNOME packages is not possible. Please re-evaluate my recommended package split: * smuxi-engine * smuxi-engine* libraries (the engine has plugins thus the wildcard is important) * bin/smuxi-server * smuxi-server.exe* * man1/smuxi-server.1 * all other private libraries (SmartIrcr4net, Twitterizer, ServiceStack, etc) * smuxi-frontend-gnome * bin/smuxi-frontend-gnome * smuxi-frontend-gnome* (this frontend has plugins thus the wildcard is important) * man1/smuxi-frontend-gnome.1 * smuxi-frontend-stfl * bin/smuxi-frontend-stfl * smuxi-frontend-stfl.exe* * man1/smuxi-frontend-stfl.1 This the smallest possible split that still allows to install a) server-only without X11/GUI dependencies, b) just the GNOME frontend c) just the console frontend (without X11/GUI)
(In reply to Mirco Bauer from comment #15) > The current package split is problematic. It doesn't allow a console > frontend only install without installing X11/GNOME packages. Also a > smuxi-server only install without X11/GNOME packages is not possible. > > Please re-evaluate my recommended package split: > > * smuxi-engine > * smuxi-engine* libraries (the engine has plugins thus the wildcard is > important) > * bin/smuxi-server > * smuxi-server.exe* > * man1/smuxi-server.1 > * all other private libraries (SmartIrcr4net, Twitterizer, ServiceStack, > etc) > > * smuxi-frontend-gnome > * bin/smuxi-frontend-gnome > * smuxi-frontend-gnome* (this frontend has plugins thus the wildcard is > important) > * man1/smuxi-frontend-gnome.1 > > * smuxi-frontend-stfl > * bin/smuxi-frontend-stfl > * smuxi-frontend-stfl.exe* > * man1/smuxi-frontend-stfl.1 > > This the smallest possible split that still allows to install a) server-only > without X11/GUI dependencies, b) just the GNOME frontend c) just the console > frontend (without X11/GUI) Is it okay for you? --> https://www.diffchecker.com/5mm6aq3b I wish keep smuxi, smuxi-engine, smuxi-stfl packages.
I explained 2 times why my proposal is the optimal solution. I am not going to invest more time on this. Do whatever is right for Fedora. Disclaimer: I don't know the criteria Fedora uses to split packages, I only do know those practice/rules for Debian. Nonetheless, thank you a lot for caring for Smuxi and packaging it for Fedora!
(In reply to Mirco Bauer from comment #17) > I explained 2 times why my proposal is the optimal solution. I am not going > to invest more time on this. Do whatever is right for Fedora. Disclaimer: I > don't know the criteria Fedora uses to split packages, I only do know those > practice/rules for Debian. > > Nonetheless, thank you a lot for caring for Smuxi and packaging it for > Fedora! My intention was not underestimate what you say. I modified package according to your advices: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/smuxi.git/tree/smuxi.spec
smuxi-0.11-3.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/smuxi-0.11-3.fc20
smuxi-0.11-3.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/smuxi-0.11-3.fc21
Thank you!
smuxi-0.11-3.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository.
smuxi-0.11-3.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.
smuxi-0.11-3.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.