Spec URL: http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SPECS/micq.spec SRPM URL: http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SRPMS/7/micq-0.5.4.2-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: mICQ is a portable, small, yet powerful console based ICQ client. It supports password changing, auto-away, creation of new accounts, searching, file transfer, acknowledged messages, SMS, client identification, logging, scripting, transcoding, multi-UIN usage and other features that makes it a very complete yet simple internationalized client supporting the current ICQ v8 protocol. It has leading support for (ICQ2002+/ICQ Lite/ICQ2go) unicode encoded messages unreached by other ICQ clones. A lot of other ICQ clients are based in spirit on mICQ, nevertheless mICQ is still _the_ console based ICQ client.
Some random comments for 0.5.4.2-1: * %changelog place - Please write %changelog at the last of the spec file. %changelog will get longer and longer in the future and writing %changelog in the middle of the spec file makes it difficult to check the spec file easily. * Unneeded macro - Fedora surely has gnutls-devel, tcl-devel and _without_ssl macro or so are redundant. * Parallel make - Support parallel make when possible (check the section "Parallel make" of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines ) ! From build.log: (available from: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=147235 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/scratch/mtasaka/task_147235/ ) * Possibly missing BuildRequires: ------------------------------------------------------ checking for libotr LIBS... -lotr checking for libotr headers version 3.x >= 3.0.0... not present. checking for otrl_message_receiving in -lotr... no ------------------------------------------------------ - Perhaps libotr-devel is missing from BuildRequires. * compilation flags ------------------------------------------------------ make[1]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/micq-0.5.4.2/src' gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../include -DPKGDATADIR='"/usr/share/micq"' -I../include -O4 -Wall -c -o autopackage_prefix.o autopackage_prefix.c ------------------------------------------------------- - Fedora specific compilation flags are not honored (please check: "Compiler flags" of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines ) ! Note that %configure sets CFLAGS as environment. Please check what %configure actually does by "rpm --eval %configure". - (On Fedora) compilation flag "-O4" is forbidden. This makes debugging difficult. * Lang specific files -------------------------------------------------------- %files %{_mandir}/*/man?/* -------------------------------------------------------- - Language specific files should be mark properly as %lang(foo), e.g. -------------------------------------------------------- %lang(de) %{_mandir}/de/man?/* -------------------------------------------------------- * Non-utf8 files -------------------------------------------------------- micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/uk/man7/micq.7.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/ru/man7/micq.7.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/sk/man1/micq.1.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/sk/man5/micqrc.5.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/ru/man1/micq.1.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/sk/man7/micq.7.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/it/man1/micq.1.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/uk/man1/micq.1.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/ru/man5/micqrc.5.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/pt_BR/man5/micqrc.5.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/pt_BR/man1/micq.1.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/pt_BR/man7/micq.7.gz ---------------------------------------------------------- - These files are not encoded with UTF-8. Please change the encoding to UTF-8. * Questionable permission ----------------------------------------------------------- micq.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/micq-0.5.4.2/example-micq-event-script ----------------------------------------------------------- - Usually documents should not have executable permission. * EVR in the changelog - Please add EVR (Epoch:Version:Releae) infomation in the %changelog. For example: ----------------------------------------------------------- * Sun Aug 26 2007 Jan ONDREJ (SAL) <ondrejj(at)salstar.sk> - 0.5.4.2-1 - rpmlint cleanups ----------------------------------------------------------- Note: please increment release number (when version does not change) each time you modify your spec/srpm.
I think all problems have been solved. Permissions for example-micq-event-script have been not changed, because it is not a real usable script, only an example. An user need to copy this script and update it and then he can fix permissions for its copy. Changelog: * Wed Sep 05 2007 Jan ONDREJ (SAL) <ondrejj(at)salstar.sk> - 0.5.4.2-2 - changelog section moved to end of spec file - compilation condition removed - paralel compilation support added - libotr-devel added to BuildRequires to build package on f8 too - compilation flags updated (-O4 removed) - man files converted to UTF-8 - added lang macros for man pages - EVR added to changelog entries New SRPM: http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SRPMS/7/micq-0.5.4.2-2.fc7.src.rpm Spec file location has been not changed (only content updated).
Created attachment 187671 [details] patch for micq 0.5.4.2 to fix glibc open issue
Well, lookingly much better!! For 0.5.4.2-2: A. Build issue: 1. glibc "open" issue: - This time, rebuild for 0.5.4.2-2 fails: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=148606 This is rawhide glibc (2.6.90) "open(2)" change (related discussion here) http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-August/msg00265.html The attached patch should solve this problem. Note: the reason -1 did not fail is because -1 did not pass "-Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2" correctly. 2. Missing BuildRequires - And even after my patch is applied, the build still fails: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=148844 /usr/bin/enconv is in enca package and at least "BuildRequires: enca" is needed. B. Then: * Description stage -------------------------------------------------------- Authors: Matthew D. Smith (deceased) Rüdiger Kuhlmann <info> -------------------------------------------------------- - This description is not needed. "AUTHORS" document is enough. * Encoding - Still some man files are in diffferent encodings. -------------------------------------------------------- micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/it/man1/micq.1.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/pt_BR/man5/micqrc.5.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/pt_BR/man1/micq.1.gz micq.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/pt_BR/man7/micq.7.gz -------------------------------------------------------- * Timestamps - This package installs many text files (and so on) and keeping timestamps on those files are preferable. The following will keep them. ---------------------------------------------------------- make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p" ---------------------------------------------------------- Then, as this is a "sponsor needed" ticket: ------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to "show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines" as is described on : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a "pre-review" of other person's review request (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on: http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html (NOTE: please don't choose "Merge Review") Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets ------------------------------------------------------------
OK, new update ChangeLog: - added forgotten enca to BuildRequires - updated description (removed author) - install keeps file tempstamps New package URL: http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SRPMS/7/micq-0.5.4.2-3.fc7.src.rpm I am unable to detect, which encoding has been used for mentioned man pages. Author of micq has been contacted to give me more information and contacting man page authors is planned. Before they tell me more, I can't update them. :( Where I need to put reviewed package bug numbers? Here? There is one (mondo): 187318 Can you tell me how your report reviews has been generated? They are very nice. :)
(In reply to comment #5) > New package URL: > http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SRPMS/7/micq-0.5.4.2-3.fc7.src.rpm > > I am unable to detect, which encoding has been used for mentioned man pages. I guess that the encoding is actually ISO-8859-1, however it seems that the usage of "convmv" is wrong. It seems that the lines ------------------------------------------------- convmv -f iso8859-1 -t UTF-8 -r doc/de/ convmv -f iso8859-1 -t UTF-8 -r doc/pt_BR/ convmv -f iso8859-1 -t UTF-8 -r doc/it/ ------------------------------------------------- actually do nothing. Would you just use normal "iconv"?
(In reply to comment #5) > Can you tell me how your report reviews has been generated? > They are very nice. :) How? Well, I don't know how to answer to this question, however: * First we have to check http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines and "so on". Actually there are many cases in which we also have to check other guidelines, mostly under: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ * Then I just say that we come to know how to review requests and to write the review results after we try more and more reviews :) Actually I have reviewed more that 170 packages. Some reviewers use some templates for reviews, while I don't use templates...
> I guess that the encoding is actually ISO-8859-1, however it seems > that the usage of "convmv" is wrong. It seems that the lines > actually do nothing. Would you just use normal "iconv"? Yes, done. You are right, that convmv is wrong. http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SRPMS/7/micq-0.5.4.2-3.fc7.src.rpm rpmlint now says only a warning about example script in documentation, which can be OK by me. Anything else wrong in this package? :-)
Oops, wrong URL, sorry. http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SRPMS/7/micq-0.5.4.2-4.fc7.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Can you tell me how your report reviews has been generated? > > They are very nice. :) > > How? Well, I don't know how to answer to this question, however: They looked very nice for me and I think, you are using an automated tool except rpmlint. :-) Now I can work better with rpmlink (after more reviews) and I am able to make similiar reports, but I am too lazy to write that nice as you. :-) > * First we have to check > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines > and "so on". Actually there are many cases in which we also > have to check other guidelines, mostly under: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ Done. > * Then I just say that we come to know how to review requests > and to write the review results after we try more and more reviews :) > Actually I have reviewed more that 170 packages. Hmm, is is more tham 4% of all Fedora packages. Good work. :-) OK, there are my another reviews: 250904 fuse-python - Python bindings for FUSE 254142 OpenSER - Open Source SIP Server and my first approved package: 280211 aspell-sk - Slovak dictionaries for Aspell
Okay. -------------------------------------------------------- This package (micq) is APPROVED by me -------------------------------------------------------- ============================================== This package (ice) is APPROVED by me ============================================== Please follow the procedure according to: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join from "Get a Fedora Account". At a point a mail should be sent to sponsor members which notifies that you need a sponsor (at the stage, please also write on this bug for confirmation that you requested for sponsorship) Then I will sponsor you. If you want to import this package into Fedora 7, you also have to look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UpdatesSystem/Bodhi-info-DRAFT (after once you rebuilt this package on Fedora rebuilding system). If you have questions, please ask me.
(In reply to comment #11) > ============================================== > This package (ice) is APPROVED by me > ============================================== Please ignore this line...
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: micq Short Description: Text/line based ICQ client with many features Owners: ondrejj Branches: FC-6 F-7 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes
cvs done.
* Please rebuild this package also on devel repo * For F-7 repo, please request to move from testing to stable repo. After you successfully rebuild this on devel, please close this bug as NEXTRELEASE.
(In reply to comment #15) > * Please rebuild this package also on devel repo Done. > * For F-7 repo, please request to move from testing to stable repo. Done. > After you successfully rebuild this on devel, please close this > bug as NEXTRELEASE. And what with FC6 package? Is it possible to release micq for FC6 too? I have built it in but it is in "needsign" state. Is there a bodhi or something similiar for FC6?
(In reply to comment #16) > (In reply to comment #15) > > * Please rebuild this package also on devel repo > Done. Confirmed. > > * For F-7 repo, please request to move from testing to stable repo. > Done. Confirmed. > > After you successfully rebuild this on devel, please close this > > bug as NEXTRELEASE. > And what with FC6 package? > > Is it possible to release micq for FC6 too? I have built it in but it is in > "needsign" state. Is there a bodhi or something similiar for FC6? I checked and micq is already pushed into FE-6 repo. Now this bug can be closed.
I removed my request to release micq to stable updates, because micq has been renamed to climm. New spec and SRPM can be found here: http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SPECS/climm.spec http://www.salstar.sk/pub/fedora/SRPMS/7/climm-0.6-1.fc7.src.rpm Changelog: * Mon Sep 17 2007 Jan ONDREJ (SAL) <ondrejj(at)salstar.sk> - 0.6-1 - package renamed to climm - glibc-open patch updated for new name - added obsolete for micq What to do now? Do I need to open a new Review request for climm and close this?
Well, do avoid confusion, please close this bug again and open a new review request for climm, and add me to CC-list.
(In reply to comment #19) > Well, do avoid confusion, s/do/to
Closing this bug as duplicate with climm review request. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 292851 ***
(For review request tracking, changing status to NEXTRELEASE again)