Spec Name or Url: http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/smart.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/smart-0.40-23.src.rpm Description: "The Smart Package Manager project has the ambitious objective of creating smart and portable algorithms for solving adequately the problem of managing software upgrading and installation. This tool works in all major distributions, and will bring notable advantages over native tools currently in use (APT, APT-RPM, YUM, URPMI, etc)." o Config files (channels) for Fedora Core 4 are in a separate submission o Derived from ATrpms' packages, adapted to Fedora Extras guidelines. o Known to work under i386 and x86_64, ppc should pose no threats o conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/pam.d/smart-root: similar to what up2date does
The config files are submitted in bug #175631
Why are the config files in a separate package?
Hello Axel! :) We have already smart + configs in progress, so I'm marking these as dupes, feel free to participate in the ongoing reviews! *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 175438 ***
response to comment @2 (referencing to bug #175631): > Why are the config files in a separate package? * upstream 'smart' does not ship channel lists ==> separate channels are no artifical package-split ==> adding channel lists to the 'smart' package would also add clutter * at least in bug #175631: 'smart-channels' are packaged noarch while 'smart' is arch-specific * yum makes this too (yum + fedora-release)
up2date, too. Fedora as a vendor and all the third party repos ship the config files in a separate package. This allows flexibility in the sense that you only update the config files package instead of rebuilding the whole thing. Local site admins can simply replace this package with a package containing local mirrors, distribution updates can be made by upgrading only the config files (as future yum/smart etc. will depend on future python, you break the chicken and egg situation). There are only reasons as far as to keep the config files in its own package. But I agree it should become part of fedora-release in the long term :) (seriously, if smart does meet its expectations it would be a good candidate to be promoted to Core someday. While already have duplicate functionality by yum and up2date, smart could have benfits. But that's not to discuss yet, let smart convince users in Extras first).
Reopening due to bug 175438 comment 77 and bug 185239
Updated packages for FC5 are available at: http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/smart-0.41-27.src.rpm * Fri Mar 31 2006 Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm> - 0.41-27 - Sync with specfile from Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta at iki.fi> - Add empty-description patch (upstream issue 64). - Update multi-version to include more kernel-* variants. - Add distro.d support. - Make owner of %%{_sysconfdir}/smart and %%{_localstatedir}/lib/smart{,/packages,/channels}. * Wed Dec 21 2005 Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm> - 0.41-26 - Update to 0.41.
In reply to Jochen's review in bug 175631 comment 2: o the review is about the smart package, e.g. you probably wanted to add this to this bug report :) o smart-gui and smart-update are subpackages of smart and have no documentation directory of their own o new upstream release has been packaged o /etc/pam.d/* and /etc/security/console.apps/* are usually not replacable config files. o which parts are non UTF-8 encoded? Thanks.
In reply to Ville Skyttä's comments in PM: * Sun Apr 02 2006 Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm> - 0.41-28 - Move usermode support to the gui package. - Add cluster/gfs *-kernel variants. The new package is available here: http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/smart-0.41-28.src.rpm
One minor issue that I see immediately: smart should have Requires: fedora-package-config-smart Review: - rpmlint checks return: W: smart-update no-documentation (ok to ignore) W: smart-gui conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/pam.d/smart-root W: smart-gui conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/security/console.apps/smart-root (ok to ignore, there should be no need for the user to edit these files) W: smart-gui no-documentation (ok to ignore) - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - locales handled properly - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - .desktop file ok Minor issues: - There is one reference to /usr/bin , please replace with %{_bindir} Major Issue: - gui mode doesn't work with the included distro.py. You need to make the following change: --- distro.py.orig 2006-04-09 18:56:29.000000000 -0500 +++ distro.py 2006-04-09 18:56:48.000000000 -0500 @@ -6,9 +6,9 @@ "name": "RPM Database"}) for flavour in ("", "-smp", "-hugemem", "-largesmp", "-xen0", "-xenU", "-kdump"): - pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s" flavour) - pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s-unsupported" flavour) - pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s-devel" flavour) + pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s" % (flavour)) + pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s-unsupported" % (flavour)) + pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "kernel%s-devel" % (flavour)) for clustergfs in ("GFS", "cman", "dlm", "gnbd"): pkgconf.setFlag("multi-version", "%s-kernel%s" % (clustergfs, flavour)) ... otherwise, it gets confused in trying to call setFlag, this resolves it. Show me a package that has all of these items resolved, and I will approve it.
The new package at http://people.atrpms.net/~athimm/fedorasubmit/smart-0.41-29.src.rpm fixes the three issues from comment #10: * Mon Apr 10 2006 Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm> - 0.41-29 - Fix typos in distro.py, there were %% missing. - /usr/bin/smart-root should had been %%{_bindir}/smart-root ... - Make dependent on fedora-package-config-smart. I hadn't added the dependency to fedora-package-config-smart on purpose, because this package should be replaceable by local policies (e.g. local mirrors), and because Fedora Core's main depsolver, yum, also doesn't have a dependency on its repo files. But I see the benefits, too (yum install smart does the expected operation, no surprised users and bug reports). Thanks for reviewing!
All issues raised in this package review have been resolved in 0.41-29, this package is APPROVED. Nice work Axel, go ahead and put in your application for cvsextras access and I will sponsor you.
Have the configuration package provide "smart-config" or such and depend on that instead of the actual package name, that way it can more easily be replaced locally?
(In reply to comment #13) > Have the configuration package provide "smart-config" or such and depend on that > instead of the actual package name, that way it can more easily be replaced > locally? +1
*** Bug 185239 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Now that it's built and available in devel (as well as FC-4, FC-5) this bug should be CLOSED as NEXTRELEASE.
*** Bug 175438 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***