Bug 249614 - Review Request: x11iraf - X utilities for IRAF (Image Reduction Analysis Facility)
Summary: Review Request: x11iraf - X utilities for IRAF (Image Reduction Analysis Faci...
Status: CLOSED CANTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review   
(Show other bugs)
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mamoru TASAKA
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-Legal FE-DEADREVIEW
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2007-07-25 19:07 UTC by Sergio Pascual
Modified: 2008-02-09 15:31 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-02-09 15:31:03 UTC
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Copyright of x11iraf (3.03 KB, application/octet-stream)
2007-10-22 20:48 UTC, Sergio Pascual
no flags Details

Description Sergio Pascual 2007-07-25 19:07:04 UTC
Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/x11iraf.spec
SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/x11iraf-1.5-0.4.DEV.fc6.src.rpm
Description: The X11IRAF project provides GUI applications for IRAF (Image Reduction Analysis Facility). XGterm provides a Tek 4012 compatible graphics terminal emulation plus a datastream driven widget server capability. XTapemon is a conventional Xt/Athena application which allows the status of an IRAF 
tape job to be monitored.

Comment 1 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-10-21 07:54:45 UTC
* What I always cannot find out is under what license x11iraf
  is released. Would you please verify?

* I just tried to rebuild but it failed.
  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=203879

Comment 2 Sergio Pascual 2007-10-22 20:48:16 UTC
I asked in the iraf.net forum about the xiraf license. Here is the thread:
http://iraf.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=86447&highlight=fedora

Basically, xiraf is covered under the iraf license, that I attach here. I asked
them to include the copyright file in the net release.


Comment 3 Sergio Pascual 2007-10-22 20:48:53 UTC
Created attachment 234441 [details]
Copyright of x11iraf

Comment 4 Sergio Pascual 2007-10-22 20:50:07 UTC
I asked in the iraf.net forum about the xiraf license. Here is the thread:
http://iraf.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=86447&highlight=fedora

Basically, xiraf is covered under the iraf license, that I attach here. I asked
them to include the copyright file in the net release.


Comment 5 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-10-23 02:47:51 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> Created an attachment (id=234441) [edit]
> Copyright of x11iraf

This is MIT, acceptable, would you fix the build failure first?


Comment 6 Sergio Pascual 2007-10-28 21:01:16 UTC
I can't get to reproduce the failure. I have built it in mock for i386 and
x86_64. Could it be a problem with ppc?

Comment 7 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-10-29 14:54:54 UTC
Well, I tried i386 x86_64 ppc ppc64 and only ppc build fails.

ppc:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=218341
i386:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=218338

build.log differs at the beginning between i386 and ppc at below:
--------------------------------------------------------------
 + mkdir -p app-defaults
 make  arch      X11IRAFDIR=$PWD
 make[1]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/x11iraf-1.5'
-Configuring X11IRAF for redhat...
-Restore archived redhat objects...
+Configuring X11IRAF for linuxppc...
+Restore archived linuxppc objects...
 No object archive found; full sysgen will be needed.
----------------------------------------------------------------
So perhaps resize file are created under different directory.

The related points are perhaps in mkarch file.
----------------------------------------------------------------
    40      case linux:
    41          if (`$uname_cmd -m` == "ppc") then
    42               set mach = "linuxppc"
    43          else
    44              if (-f /etc/redhat-release) then
    45                  set mach = "redhat"
    46              else if (-f /etc/SuSE-release) then
    47                  set mach = "suse"
    48              else
    49                  set mach = "linux"
    50              endif
    51          endif
    52          breaksw
----------------------------------------------------------------

Comment 8 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-10-29 15:37:15 UTC
Well, for 1.5-0.4:

* ppc build issue
  - Please fix ppc build

* On description section:
  - Please specify full URL for Source0
  - Fix license
    - And include real license text
    - Also write a document which notifies that you have already asked
      upstream about license issue and upstream surely answered that
      this is licensed under MIT.

* Desktop files
  - At least desktop file is needed for xgterm. 

Comment 9 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-10-30 14:41:01 UTC
By the way:
If you don't have ppc machine (I don't have ppc), you can try scratch build
on koji:

$ koji build --scratch <target> <srpm_you_want_to_try>

Currently <target> can be: dist-f9, dist-f8-updates-candidate, or
dist-fc7-updates-candidate.

Comment 10 Sergio Pascual 2007-10-31 16:59:56 UTC
* Well, now it builds in ppc (thnks for the tip)
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=220167

* The license (COPYRIGHT) and the explanation (README.COPYRIGHT) are now
included. The url in Source0 is also included

* I have added a desktop file for xgterm

Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/x11iraf.spec
SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/x11iraf-1.5-0.4.DEV.fc6.src.rpm

Comment 11 Sergio Pascual 2007-10-31 17:02:39 UTC
Upss, the source rpm is
http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/x11iraf-1.5-0.5.DEV.fc7.src.rpm

Comment 12 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-10-31 18:43:49 UTC
Now I checked the whole source codes.
This time I checked only license issue and have not checked
any packaging issue yet.

* License issue
  - The licenses of the following codes are very problematic
    and cannot be accepted for Fedora _IMO_.
----------------------------------------------------------------
./obm-deep/ObmW/HTML.c
./obm-deep/ObmW/HTML.h
... and some other files under ./obm-deep/ObmW/
... and similar files under ./obm/ObmW/

./obm/ObmW/Table.c
./obm/ObmW/Table.h
... and some other files under ./obm/ObmW
----------------------------------------------------------------


  - Other licenses
    - The following has zlib/libpng license:
----------------------------------------------------------------
./obm-deep/Tcl/regexp.c
./obm/Tcl/regexp.c
----------------------------------------------------------------

    - Many TCL related files are licensed under TCL.

Comment 13 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-10-31 19:15:35 UTC
Setting FE-legal

Comment 14 Tom "spot" Callaway 2007-10-31 19:36:21 UTC
(In reply to comment #12)
> Now I checked the whole source codes.
> This time I checked only license issue and have not checked
> any packaging issue yet.
> 
> * License issue
>   - The licenses of the following codes are very problematic
>     and cannot be accepted for Fedora _IMO_.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ./obm-deep/ObmW/HTML.c
> ./obm-deep/ObmW/HTML.h
> ... and some other files under ./obm-deep/ObmW/
> ... and similar files under ./obm/ObmW/
> 
> ./obm/ObmW/Table.c
> ./obm/ObmW/Table.h
> ... and some other files under ./obm/ObmW

Yes, these files are under a license with commercial use restrictions,
accordingly, it is non-free and not permissable for Fedora.

You should make an attempt to contact the copyright holder (looks like it is
UIUC) and see if they will relicense that code.

Sorry. :/


Comment 15 Marek Mahut 2007-11-25 22:37:45 UTC
I've mailed Mr. Romanovski, I'm hoping he will help us.

Comment 16 Marek Mahut 2008-02-03 13:38:50 UTC
No response at all :((

Comment 17 Sergio Pascual 2008-02-09 13:13:08 UTC
I think we can close the bug report. xgterm is not needed to run Iraf and I'm
not interested in this package anymore

Comment 18 Mamoru TASAKA 2008-02-09 15:31:03 UTC
Okay. Then once closing.
If you got interested again, please feel free to open a new review
request and mark this bug as a duplicate of the new one.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.