Spec Name or Url: http://www.chrisgrau.com/packages/frobtads/frobtads.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.chrisgrau.com/packages/frobtads/frobtads-0.2-1.src.rpm Description: FrobTADS is a console based interpreter for text adventure games written with the TADS 2 and TADS 3 development systems.
I forgot to include the bash completion configuration I use with frobtads in the original SRPM. http://www.chrisgrau.com/packages/frobtads/frobtads.spec http://www.chrisgrau.com/packages/frobtads/frobtads-0.2-2.src.rpm %changelog * Mon Sep 5 2005 Chris Grau <chris> 0.2-2 - Added a bash-completion script to %%doc.
Going to review this more thoroughly once I'm approved for fedorabugs, but a preliminary pass: OK: * rpmlint passes cleanly on .src.rpm and binaries * package naming follows guideline * spec file name matches base package * license matches actual license * license texts included * spec in American English, legible * sources match upstream * package successfully compiled (tested on i386 so far, will check x86_64 later) * package owns its directories Nitpick: %{_datadir}/frobtads looks cleaner as %{_datadir}/frobtads/ %{_datadir}/frobtads/* Not sure: * Package license not OSI-approved - modification only for porting, selling not allowed * Saving during the game consistently results in: *** stack smashing detected ***: frob terminated Aborted though the saved game file restores fine Might be a candidate for Livna instead, anyone has experience with non-standard licenses? This looks like a combination of SuSE's old Yast license and UW's license for Pine.
(In reply to comment #2) > Not sure: > * Package license not OSI-approved - modification only for porting, selling not > allowed The license looks okay to me. I'll wait for input from one of the FE people who know more. I'll also ask the maintainer to see what he thinks about it. > * Saving during the game consistently results in: > *** stack smashing detected ***: frob terminated > Aborted Odd. Here comes the ever so annoying WORKSFORME. Which version of FC are you using? What game were you using to test? I think there may be an issue with different versions of gcc requiring different compiler flags. It's working fine for me under FC-4 x86 using a couple of different games. I'll look into this today.
these buffer overflow checks are new in the fc5 gcc; the buffer overflow itself is there just it usually is quiet in older fc's
That license is not OSI approved and seems to include restrictions incompatible with the FSF or OSI guidelines. You might want to get an additional clarification on this on the extras list though. I would recommend contacting the upstream developers and requesting a change of license, preferably an existing Free and open source license
Due to the licensing issues discussed, I am withdrawing this package.