Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 224254
Review Request: boswars - Real-time strategy game using the Stratagus game engine
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:54 EST
Spec URL: http://lemenkov.googlepages.com/bos.spec
Description: Invasion - Battle of Survival is a real-time strategy game using the
Stratagus game engine
Unfortunately I haven't enough space to host whole SRPM, so I give only direct links to the spec-file, shell script for starting game and path to the main source archive:
The main doubt for me is the name of package. Should it be bos or battle-of-survival or stratagus-bos?
Accidentally forotten patch:
>Unfortunately I haven't enough space to host whole SRPM, so I give only direct
>links to the spec-file, shell script for starting game and path to the main
I don't really know if it's approved on bugzilla...
> The main doubt for me is the name of package. Should it be bos or
>battle-of-survival or stratagus-bos?
Your package must have the same name than your tarball name as well as your spec
A lot of thing must be fix in your spec file.
I'll make a full review of your package within a few days.
- fixed some rpmlint errors and warnings
- added %doc section
I would suggest using battle-of-survival. bos is too generic. See for example,
the flight-of-the-amazon-queen and beneath-a-steel-sky review requests for
naming guidelines. These packages use the long names instead of the shortened
I have updated the spec file according to the comments, and added a desktop
file. An icon is still missing though...
The package build with mock, and rpmlint reports no errors or warning.s
Eveything can be found here: ftp://open-gnss.org/pub/fedora/battle-of-survival/
during building i got:
+ desktop-file-install --vendor=fedora
/home/tjikkun/rpmbuild/SOURCES/battle-of-survival.desktop: key "Categories"
string list not semicolon-terminated, fixing
warning: The 'Application' category is not defined by the desktop entry
specification. Please use one of "AudioVideo", "Audio", "Video", "Development",
"Education", "Game", "Graphics", "Network", "Office", "Settings", "System",
It did build ok. Trying to run however failed on my x86_64:
Maybe you need to specify another gamepath with '-d /path/to/datadir'?
This is because /usr/bin/battle-of-survival still has stratagus -d /usr/share/bos
FYI Battle of Survival renamed to Bos Wars.
New site containing new version 2.3 can be found here:
I uploaded new stull (w/o main source tarball) here:
Right now it can't be started with new version (2.2.3) of stratagus.
I just read that BOS has been renamed to "Bos Wars" and no include its own
(modfied, sigh) fork of stratagus.
The good news is that they (the BOS team) are no supporting lua5.1 with this
fork out of the box.
So I guess its time todo a new version and review that, maybe even in a new
review request, but I'll leave that up to you.
Peter, are you still interested in this? IOW ping?
Forget my last 2 comments please, I just saw in comment 7 that you already
packaged 2.3, duh!
(In reply to comment #11)
> Forget my last 2 comments please, I just saw in comment 7 that you already
> packaged 2.3, duh!
Actually I still can't make it work with default stratagus. Things looks like we
should focus on packaging previous release first instead of making patch-fest
with unclear results with the latest one.
Why don't you just use the included stratagus? They forked stratagus as they
wanted to make some changes there, so the new boswars is not designed to work
with the plain stratagus. I think its necessary (and OK) to also package the
included stratagus version together with the data. Much like tremulous which is
a modified quake engine comes with its own copy, which also is packaged as par
of the tremulous package, even though the code is 95-99% quake.
Peter, are you still interested in this? Maybe we can exchange reviews? I myself
also have several game packages awaiting review:
* asc-music - Background music for the game asc -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233256 - requires asc
* vegastrike - 3D OpenGL spaceflight simulator -
* vegastrike-data - Data files for Vega Strike -
* ballz - Platform game with some puzzle elements -
It builds but does not run:
Loading AI: passive.lua
src/ai/script_ai.cpp:345: incorrect argument
[C]: in function 'DefineAi'
[string "/usr/share/boswars/scripts/ai.lua"]:43: in function 'RegisterAi'
[string "/usr/share/boswars/scripts/ais/passive.lua"]:34: in main chunk
[C]: in function 'Load'
[string "/usr/share/boswars/scripts/ai.lua"]:101: in main chunk
[C]: in function 'Load'
[string "/usr/share/boswars/scripts/stratagus.lua"]:220: in main chunk
I traced this down to stratagus vs. bundled boswars stratagus fork. In
ai/script_ai.cpp, CclDefineAi function, stratagus from Fedora srpm checks for 4
arguments, the bundled boswars engine 3. Unless you want to patch the scripts
and whatever else boswars does differently to match stratagus, this seems
another vote for using included stratagus.
I'm willing to review this for you, but first please provide a new srpm based on
the latest upstream release, using the included stratagus fork. Since this is
clearly different (and becoming more different every release) from the
stand-alone stratagus project, it is ok to include the private fork. Just like
is done with many games which come with modded quake engines.
(In reply to comment #16)
> Peter, ping?
> I'm willing to review this for you, but first please provide a new srpm based on
> the latest upstream release, using the included stratagus fork. Since this is
> clearly different (and becoming more different every release) from the
> stand-alone stratagus project, it is ok to include the private fork. Just like
> is done with many games which come with modded quake engines.
I'll do it in a couple of days.
Still using internal version of guichan and tolua instead of system ones.
(In reply to comment #18)
> Still using internal version of guichan and tolua instead of system ones.
Didn't we fix that already for the stand-alone stratagus, couldn't those patches
be easily ported over? I think this is a blocker, so I would like to have this
sorted out before doing a full review.
Has there been any progress here?
It's been 2.5 months since the last response from the submitter; setting
NEEDINFO. I'll close this ticket soon if there's no response.
And still no response; closing.