Spec Name or Url: http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/nazghul/nazghul.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/nazghul/nazghul-0.5.3-1.src.rpm Description: Nazghul is an old-school RPG engine modeled after those made in the heyday of top-down, 2d tile-based graphics. It is specifically modeled after Ultima V. Note that this SRPM builds two packages: nazghul, the game engine and nazghul-haxima, the supplied game, which is just plain text scheme code along with some images. rpmlint output: W: nazghul-haxima no-documentation
Builds fine in mock (FC4) and plays well for this old Ultima geek (10yrs+ udic.org member :-)). - rpmlint is mostly happy aside the lack of doco in the haxima subpackage - nazgul-haxima should be noarch - rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/haxima.sh - > rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.... - Rather than use chmod during %install use %attr in %files (my preference) - install -Dp instead of mkdir/install -p for the haxima icon? - %exclude %{_datadir}/nazghul/haxima in base package - why? - list fedora-haxima.desktop & haxima.png in %files rather than using a wildcard as you probably don't want to own all desktop and pixmap files I'll take this bug for a fuller review a little later (once my bz group membership is sorted)
Point-by-point comnments: Note that is is not possible to build both noarch and arch-dependent packages from the same specfile, so nazghul-haxima cannot be noarch. If they packaged it separately then I could just build it as a separate package. I was wanting the rm to fail if haxima.sh isn't installed so the package won't build, but it's immaterial. It's actually an upstream bug that the provided script isn't correct, so I think I'll just patch the upstream bug and let this go away. This steps around the chmod/%attr issue as well. Never used install -D; I'll switch. The main package owns %{_datadir}/nazghul, but the subpackage owns the subdirectory. (This is in perhaps optimistic preparation for more games using the engine; packages should not own the same directory if possible.) I'll use %dir and skip the exclude. True; if there are ever other games in the base package I will have to list them separately so I might as well do it now. Updated spec and src.rpm are in http://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/rpms/nazghul/
Point noted regarding the subpackage architecture (RFE?) I've downloaded the newer SRPM and am putting it through it's paces now. I'll let you know how it goes
Review for release 2: * RPM name is OK * Source nazghul-0.5.3.tar.gz is the same as upstream * This is the latest version * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint of nazghul looks OK * File list of nazghul looks OK * File list of nazghul-haxima looks OK * Runs perfectly well on Core 4 with current updates Needs work (but not a blocker IMHO): W: nazghul-haxima no-documentation * Something in %doc for the haxima subpackage to keep rpmlint happy? I'm old enough to remember the old Ultimas, the young 'uns might not be so fortunate - RFE upstream for some backstory? :-P But I digress... APPROVED
It seems there are 64bit issues which prevent the package from building on x86_64. Catsting void* to int, it looks like. I didn't think people did that any longer. I'm going to hack around a bit before declaring this ExclusiveArch: i386.
OK, after a bit of hacking I have a clean build on all three architectures. I also packaged some additional documentation including adding a users' guide to the haxima subpackage.