Spec URL: http://www.symetrix.com/~bjohnson/projects/Fedora-Extras/unpaper.spec SRPM URL: http://www.symetrix.com/~bjohnson/projects/Fedora-Extras/unpaper-0_2-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: unpaper is a post-processing tool for scanned sheets of paper, especially for book pages that have been scanned from previously created photocopies. The main purpose is to make scanned book pages better readable on screen after conversion to PDF. Additionally, unpaper might be useful to enhance the quality of scanned pages before performing optical character recognition (OCR). unpaper tries to clean scanned images by removing dark edges that appeared through scanning or copying on areas outside the actual page content (e.g. dark areas between the left-hand-side and the right-hand-side of a double- sided book-page scan). The program also tries to detect disaligned centering and rotation of pages and will automatically straighten each page by rotating it to the correct angle. This process is called "deskewing".
GOOD - rpmlint does not return anything, either on source or on binary rpm - 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, is latest version, sha1sum is c61552c71184ca7021a6b1737dbd7b35ae77fd19 /home/wolfy/unpaper-0_2.tgz - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no BR at all (just gcc which is in exception list) - no locales - not relocatable - owns all files and directories that it creates, does not take ownership of foreign files/directories - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - not a GUI, so no need for .desktop file - no .la / static/ .pc files SHOULD - package builds fine in mock / devel /x86_64 - works OK (from gscan2pdf ...) package APPROVED
One thing that I'd like to point out before this package is imported: The tarball contains a binary. Does this warrant a rebuild of the tarball or do we just ignore it?
I've noticed that there is a debian binary inside. Best option would be (I think) to ping upstream to re-release the software sources without the binary (that's why we call it "sources", right ?), and provide a separate binary if he wishes to. Otherwise, as http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?highlight=%28Packaging%29#head-c23c2cd3782be842dc7ab40c35199c07cfbfe347 is pretty clear that no binaries should be included, I guess the only option is to repackage the source, adding a comment in the spec explaining the reason for this action.
I will remove the binary from the fedora sources and ping upstream about it.
Spec URL: http://www.symetrix.com/~bjohnson/projects/Fedora-Extras/unpaper.spec SRPM URL: http://www.symetrix.com/~bjohnson/projects/Fedora-Extras/unpaper-0_2-2.fc6.src.rpm * Mon Mar 19 2007 Bernard Johnson <bjohnson> - 0_2-2 - repackage tgz file without included ELF binary
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: unpaper Short Description: Post-processing of scanned and photocopied book pages Owners: bjohnson Branches: FC-5 FC-6 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC:
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: unpaper New Branches: epel7 Owners: bjohnson
Git done (by process-git-requests).