Spec URL: <http://reciteword.cosoft.org.cn/redhat/zhcon.spec> SRPM URL: <http://reciteword.cosoft.org.cn/redhat/zhcon-0.2.6-1.src.rpm> Description: Zhcon is a fast Linux Console Chinese System which supports framebuffer device.It can display Chinese, Japanese or Korean double byte characters.Supported language encodings include: GB2312, GBK, BIG5, JIS and KSC. It can also use input methods(table based) from M$ pwin98 and UCDOS for M$-DOG.
You need to add ncurses-devel in BuildRequires also add disttag ,correct buildroot mock build is failing with chmod 4755 /usr/bin/zhcon chmod: cannot access '/usr/bin/zhcon': No such file or directory.
OK, I will add ncurses-devel. What does add disttag mean? The build root is right in my system, in Makefile.am: install-exec-local: chmod 4755 $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/zhcon It should already be right, I don't know why it don't work on your system, can you tell me how to modify it?
Hi, Hu Zheng. * What about to move zhcon.conf to %{_sysconfdir}? * The INSTALL file is not needed for %doc, since it's only used when build from source. * Correct the BuildRoot tag : BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) * The vendor tag is reserved for Redhat or Fedora Project.
Created attachment 148040 [details] Corrected some incorrect things in SPEC Here is some SPEC work for you.
Well, * Specify the location of the source. * Don't use "zhcon-0.2.5-to-0.2.6.diff". Please use the source 0.2.6 directly. * The content of zhcon-0.2.6-path.patch is wrong. ------------------------------------------------ + $(INSTALL_DATA) $(srcdir)/zhcon.conf $(DESTDIR)$(prefix)/etc/zhcon.conf ------------------------------------------------ - The location of $(prefix)/etc/zhcon.conf is not right. - Note: the location of conf file is hardcoded. From src/zhcon.cpp: ------------------------------------------------ 124 if (access(cfgfile.c_str(), R_OK) != 0) 125 cfgfile = "/etc/zhcon.conf"; 126 ------------------------------------------------ Some reviewers say that it would be better to use: ------------------------------------------------ %{__sed} -i -e 's|/etc/zhcon.conf|%{_sysconfdir}/zhcon.conf|' \ src/zhcon.cpp ------------------------------------------------ to use rpm macro correctly. - And.. please avoid to use autotools as much as possible. i.e. when it is possible to apply a patch against not Makefile.am but Makefile.in, please make a patch for Makefile.in and don't call automake etc. For chown, I will check later.
I have updated the files, you can download them again. The author changed the file path from /etc/zhcon.conf to PREFIX "/etc/zhcon.conf", I don't know why him change this. zhcon need the 4755 permission to access some devices. The author didn't release a 0.2.6 source tarball, only the patch is provided. Thanks everyone for concerning this :)
(In reply to comment #6) > I have updated the files, you can download them again. Umm.. where? Note: please bump the release number every time you fix the spec file. * chown > zhcon need the 4755 permission to access some devices. - I checked the spec from Parag, still failing mockbuild on FC7 i386. Well, src/Makefile.in still says: --------------------------------------- install-exec-local: chmod 4755 $(bindir)/zhcon --------------------------------------- It seems that automake is not called recursively. So please apply a patch for Makefile.in. * %attr - And use %attr for binaries which needs setuid/setgid bits. Unless using %attr, rpmbuild removes the setuid/setgid bits on creating rpm. - dist tag Using dist tag %{?dist} makes it easier to manage spec files on different branches and this is recommended. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag - quiet setup - setup is not quiet. Please use "%setup -q" - and please make it quite to expand files from tarball i.e. Don't use "zxvf" for tar. and please use "zxf".
Here is the newest version: http://reciteword.cosoft.org.cn/redhat/zhcon.spec http://reciteword.cosoft.org.cn/redhat/zhcon-0.2.6-1.src.rpm The main problem is mock didn't pass. But it is OK on my system, so I think patch the Makefile.in is not the solution. The problem should be some things are lacked in Buildrequires, I doubt it is intltool etc., which make automake failed. Any one can help me to figure it out? I can't install mock presently as it need 10G disk space, which I don't have presently, I will try it on another machine.
Created attachment 148044 [details] I have a spec of zhcon myself, and it used in fedora-cn. You can try the attachment. In this spec, I use autoreconf to reconf the autotool stuff, it works in fedora-cn's chroot build(not mock, but alike)
Comment on attachment 148044 [details] I have a spec of zhcon myself, and it used in fedora-cn. You can try the attachment. In this spec, I use autoreconf to reconf the autotool stuff, it works in fedora-cn's chroot build(not mock, but alike) I have a spec of zhcon myself, and it used in fedora-cn. You can try the attachment. In this spec, I use autoreconf to reconf the autotool stuff, it works in fedora-cn's chroot build(not mock, but alike)
Umm?? I saw that you added this package to SyncNeeded, however no one approved this package yet... Mockbuild still fails and some fixes is needed. Note: Please increase the release number each time you modify your spec file (and add some description to %changlog accordingly). Creating new srpm/spec without release number changed causes confusion on the people who are checking the package...
Well, check the following... http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SPECS/zhcon.spec http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/SRPMS/zhcon-0.2.6-2.1.src.rpm http://www.ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~mtasaka/dist/extras/development/LOGS/MOCK-zhcon.log Everyone, do these work?
Mamoru, Your SRPM is working fine. But what about rpmlint errors coming on binary RPM?
(In reply to comment #13) > Mamoru, > Your SRPM is working fine. But what > about rpmlint errors coming on binary RPM? Perhaps you are referring to the following? E: zhcon setuid-binary /usr/bin/zhcon root 04755 E: zhcon non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/zhcon 04755 This is because zhcon binary has setuid bit. Zheng (who is the submitter) explained this briefly (In reply to comment #6) > zhcon need the 4755 permission to access some devices. I don't know the details of this package, however, it seems that the right to access some device files under /dev is needed for this binary.
Notes: There are some applications which deals with multibyte characters on CUI. * bogl-bterm (maintained Miloslav Trmac) dropped setuid bits on /usr/bin/bterm, so currently only root can use this. * jfbterm (maintained by me) also remoded setuid bits, however console.perms file is introduced by the original maintainer (outside Fedora). Currently root or the first person who logged in to CUI can use jfbterm * kon2 (was maintained by Akira Tagoh, however kon2 was dropped... I don't know the reason) used setuid bits on /usr/bin/kon2.
Zheng, would you check my spec/srpm?
Hi Tasaka, I've test your SRPM in FC6. Mock build was success, and it works under framebuffer. But I have some suggestion on the setuid excutable program. Setuid is generally a bad idea. This program needs setuid bit just to access /dev/fb(under framebuffer) or /dev/mem(under vga mode). So I recommend that we leave the policy to user : they can be set group of /dev/fb,/dev/mem properly by udev or just set sudo if they know what it means. B.T.W : This is Chinese New Year recently. Don't know how long Hu will be absent. But also Happy Chinese New Year to you all :D
(In reply to comment #17) > Hi Tasaka, I've test your SRPM in FC6. Mock build was success, and it works > under framebuffer. Thanks. > So I recommend that we leave the > policy to user : I leave this as how Hu thinks of this.
I think setuid is not a big problem, it is convenience from user's aspect, which just run and work fine. I think this can be the final version.
(In reply to comment #19) > I think this can be the final version. This refers to my spec/srpm (comment 12)? If so, I changed the directories where the files are installed according to FHS and something else. conf: /usr/etc -> /etc data: /usr/lib -> /usr/share/ (check: zhcon-0.2.6-path-define.patch) So for this you have to write README.fedora for fedora specific issue so that the user of fedora version zhcon can find the files which are expected to be installed by zhcon correctly.
Yes, I mean the file in comment 12. It is good to change the file path to /etc and /usr/share, but this should won't affect users much.
Well, then would you recheck my spec/srpm, add some fixes if you want and resubmit (with the release number changed to integer)? After that I will re-review your (originally my) spec/srpm...
OK, here are them: http://reciteword.cosoft.org.cn/redhat/zhcon.spec http://reciteword.cosoft.org.cn/redhat/zhcon-0.2.6-3.src.rpm rpmlint is fine except setuid warning. I just updated the release interger.
Well, * Documentaion - The following documents are encoded in non-UTF8 coding. Please change to UTF-8 ------------------------------------------------------- ChangeLog ISO-8859-1 ------------------------------------------------------- - The following documents may be useful and can be included as %doc ? ------------------------------------------------------- README.utf8 doc/README.html ------------------------------------------------------- - Some documents are for Chinese users. Please mark the documents as %lang(zh_??) %doc ...... (I don't know the different between traditional and simplified Chinese). Well as you need a sponsor, you have to follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/HowToGetSponsored As written as -------------------------------------------------------- The best ways for you to illustrate your understanding of the packaging guidelines are to submit quality packages and to assist with package reviews. -------------------------------------------------------- Usually: - If there are some other review requests you have already sumbitted, I may judge if I can sponsor you by checking other review requests of you. - If not (i.e. this is the only package you sumbitted for now), you have to do a pre-review of other review requests. So, as it seems that currently this is a only package you are to maintain, would you do a pre-review of other person's review requests? The review requests which are still waiting for someone to review can be found from: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&component=Package+Review&component_text=&query_format=advanced&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=CLOSED&bug_status=NEEDINFO&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=ON_DEV&bug_status=ON_QA&bug_status=FAILS_QA&bug_status=RELEASE_PENDING&bug_status=POST&long_desc_type=substring&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&fixed_in_type=allwordssubstr&fixed_in=&qa_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&qa_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=exact&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailqa_contact2=1&emailcc2=1&emailtype2=exact&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&changedin=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=short_desc&type0-0-0=notsubstring&value0-0-0=Merge&field1-0-0=assigned_to&type1-0-0=equals&value1-0-0=nobody%40fedoraproject.org&field2-0-0=bug_status&type2-0-0=notequals&value2-0-0=CLOSED
Updated: http://reciteword.cosoft.org.cn/redhat/zhcon.spec http://reciteword.cosoft.org.cn/redhat/zhcon-0.2.6-3.src.rpm I didn't change the release number for clean. ChangeLog converted to UTF-8, README.utf8 and doc/README.html added, %lang tag added. I already get sponsored, but I will try to review some other packages as your suggestion :) Thank you!
ping?
What should we do next?
Well, according to your comment; (In reply to comment #25) > I already get sponsored, but I will try to review some other packages as your > suggestion :) I was expecting that you would try to pre-review some other packages.
Hello, Zhu. This bug still block FE-NEEDSPONSOR, however according to your comment, are you already sponsored??
I have already get sponsored. I have reviewed the wqy-bitmapfont package too. Have the review get past? If so, we can add the fedora-cvs tag.
The okay. --------------------------------------------------- This package (zhcon) is APPROVED by me. ---------------------------------------------------
Please use the CVS request template found here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure And reset the fedora-cvs flag with an entry using that.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: zhcon Short Description: A Fast Console CJK System Using FrameBuffer Owners: zhu Branches: FC-6 InitialCC:
I suggest removing the following part of the description before importing: "It can also use input methods(table based) from M$ pwin98 and UCDOS for M$-DOG." Since setuid was dropped from bogl and jfterm, it might be worth discussing it on the fedora-maintainers or fedora-devel list before building?
Discussion about the setuid issue: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-security-list/2007-April/msg00004.html
A bit late now but I suggest replacing "CJK" with "Chinese".