Spec URL: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libEMF.spec SRPM URL: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libEMF-1.0.3-1.src.rpm Description: libEMF is a library for generating Enhanced Metafiles on systems which don't natively support the ECMA-234 Graphics Device Interface (GDI). The library is intended to be used as a driver for other graphics programs such as Grace or gnuplot. Therefore, it implements a very limited subset of the GDI.
That's a bit strange that this package isn't already in fedora, given that gnuplot, pstoedit and grace are already there. Once the CVS is back to life I'll investigate a bit to understand what is happening.
Well, it seems that * gnuplot has its original source code (not the copy of libEMF) to support EMF output * http://libemf.sourceforge.net says that support of libEMF for grace is forthcoming * By the way http://libemf.sourceforge.net says 'this software includes patches to those programs (here gnuplot) to add the EMF as an output option, however, where is the patch? (not a blocker) * Currently FE pstoedit spec file has %configure --disable-static --without-emf --without-swf I will check this later anyway.
Well, first review of libEMF 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines : * Licensing - Include license document(s). * Use rpmlint ------------------------------------------------------ E: libEMF-debuginfo script-without-shebang /usr/src/debug/libEMF-1.0.3/libemf/libemf.h W: libEMF-devel summary-not-capitalized libEMF header files ------------------------------------------------------ - The formar issue is permission problem. Change the permission to 0644. - The latter issue can be ignored, in my opinion. * Timestamps - -devel package includes many header files and keeping timestamps on these files is preferred as it makes clear - when those files are written - whether those files are modified by vendor So please keep timestamps on those files. Under my check, this can be done by using: ------------------------------------------------------- %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT export CPPROG="cp -p" %{__make} install \ DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT ------------------------------------------------------- 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : (= Okay) 3. Other things I have noticed: * %check Well, this package has tests/ directory and some tests are included, so I think including %check script in the spec is a good idea.
(In reply to comment #3) > Well, first review of libEMF > > 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines : > * Licensing > - Include license document(s). Done. > * Use rpmlint I already did... > ------------------------------------------------------ > E: libEMF-debuginfo script-without-shebang > /usr/src/debug/libEMF-1.0.3/libemf/libemf.h > W: libEMF-devel summary-not-capitalized libEMF header files > ------------------------------------------------------ > - The formar issue is permission problem. Change the permission to > 0644. How? This is an automatically generated -debuginfo package. > - The latter issue can be ignored, in my opinion. OK. > * Timestamps > - -devel package includes many header files and keeping timestamps > on these files is preferred as it makes clear > - when those files are written > - whether those files are modified by vendor > So please keep timestamps on those files. > Under my check, this can be done by using: > ------------------------------------------------------- > %install > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > export CPPROG="cp -p" > %{__make} install \ > DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT > ------------------------------------------------------- Done. Although I'm surprised you've asked for this. This is the first time I've ever seen this trick. > 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : > (= Okay) > > 3. Other things I have noticed: > * %check > Well, this package has tests/ directory and some tests are > included, so I think including %check script in the spec is > a good idea. Added. http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libEMF.spec http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/libEMF-1.0.3-2.src.rpm
Well, before checking 1.0.3-2: (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > E: libEMF-debuginfo script-without-shebang > > /usr/src/debug/libEMF-1.0.3/libemf/libemf.h > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > - The formar issue is permission problem. Change the permission to > > 0644. > > How? This is an automatically generated -debuginfo package. Just: --------------------------------------------- chmod 0644 libemf/libemf.h --------------------------------------------- at the last of %prep stage.
Okay, please add the line --------------------------------------------- chmod 0644 libemf/libemf.h --------------------------------------------- at the last of %prep to avoid rpmlint complaint of -debuginfo rpm. All things else are okay. ---------------------------------------- This package (libEMF) is APPROVED by me ----------------------------------------
Ah, sorry. I feel dumb now for not seeing this. Thanks for the review.
Imported and built for devel, FC6 and FC5 branches requested. Thanks again for the review.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: libEMF New Branches: EL-5
cvs done.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: libEMF Updated EPEL Owners: rathann,rmyers Rob Myers has offered to co-maintain for EPEL.