Bug 281901 - Review Request: cheese - A webcam application for snapshots and movies
Review Request: cheese - A webcam application for snapshots and movies
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
: 281891 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2007-09-07 01:31 EDT by Matthias Clasen
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:12 EST (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2007-09-07 22:15:24 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---
bnocera: fedora‑review+
kevin: fedora‑cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Matthias Clasen 2007-09-07 01:31:05 EDT
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/mclasen/cheese/cheese.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/mclasen/cheese/cheese-0.2.4-1.fc8.src.rpm
Description: 
Cheese is a Photobooth-inspired GNOME application for taking pictures and
videos from a webcam. It also includes fancy graphical effects based on the
gstreamer-backend.
Comment 1 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-09-07 02:10:16 EDT
Oh, what timing!

Please discuss with Rahul who will be the maintainer of cheese
(bug 281891)
Comment 2 Mamoru TASAKA 2007-09-07 08:26:09 EDT
*** Bug 281891 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 3 Bastien Nocera 2007-09-07 10:23:18 EDT
From the spec file:
BuildRequires: gstreamer-plugins-good-devel 

That doesn't seem to be checked for or used anywhere. Did you mean to have the
package itself as a requires instead? (make sure you require a version of
gstreamer-plugins-good that has v4l2 plugins as well)

BuildRequires: xorg-x11-proto-devel
BuildRequires: libXxf86vm-devel

what are those used for? There doesn't seem to be any X checks or headers used
in the sources.

Should the Source be that instead?
http://live.gnome.org/Cheese/Releases?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
Comment 4 Bastien Nocera 2007-09-07 10:40:11 EDT
rpmlint output:
W: cheese mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 47)

(unimportant)

- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.

OK

- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines.

OK

- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.



- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.

OK

- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.

OK

- MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.

OK

- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.

No problems there, although this sounds a bit weird (unneeded?)
"It also includes fancy graphical effects based on the 
gstreamer-backend."

- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the reviewer is unable
to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform a review. Fedora is not
the place for entries into the Obfuscated Code Contest (http://www.ioccc.org/).

OK

- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.

OK.

- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.

OK.

- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines; inclusion of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.

See above.

- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.

OK.

- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.

N/A

- MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.

N/A

- MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for examples.

OK

- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.

OK.

- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.

OK

- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).

OK

- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.

OK.

- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is described
in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.

OK.

- MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity)

N/A

- MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.

OK

- MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.

N/A

- MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.

N/A

- MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for
directory ownership and usability).

N/A

- MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package.

N/A

- MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release} 

N/A

- MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.

N/A

- MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. This is described in detail in the desktop files section of
Packaging Guidelines. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not
need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.

OK

- MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package
owns, then please present that at package review time.

OK.

- MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). See Prepping BuildRoot For %install for details.

OK

- MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

OK



Looks good apart from the few comments in comment #3
Comment 5 Matthias Clasen 2007-09-07 10:43:44 EDT
> That doesn't seem to be checked for or used anywhere. Did you mean to have the
> package itself as a requires instead? (make sure you require a version of
> gstreamer-plugins-good that has v4l2 plugins as well)

Probably right.

> BuildRequires: xorg-x11-proto-devel
> BuildRequires: libXxf86vm-devel
> 
> what are those used for? There doesn't seem to be any X checks or headers used
> in the sources.

I added them because the build fails without them...

> Should the Source be that instead?
>
http://live.gnome.org/Cheese/Releases?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

In the best of all possible worlds, yes
in the real world, "make source" can't handle the ? in the url
Comment 6 Bastien Nocera 2007-09-07 10:46:30 EDT
(In reply to comment #5)
> > That doesn't seem to be checked for or used anywhere. Did you mean to have the
> > package itself as a requires instead? (make sure you require a version of
> > gstreamer-plugins-good that has v4l2 plugins as well)
> 
> Probably right.

FYI, it's gstreamer-plugins-good >= 0.10.6-2

> > BuildRequires: xorg-x11-proto-devel
> > BuildRequires: libXxf86vm-devel
> > 
> > what are those used for? There doesn't seem to be any X checks or headers used
> > in the sources.
> 
> I added them because the build fails without them...

Missing BRs in gtk+?

> > Should the Source be that instead?
> >
>
http://live.gnome.org/Cheese/Releases?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
> 
> In the best of all possible worlds, yes
> in the real world, "make source" can't handle the ? in the url

Never mind then.
Comment 7 Matthias Clasen 2007-09-07 10:56:59 EDT
> Missing BRs in gtk+?

No, the cheese "configure" checks for them. 
Comment 8 Bastien Nocera 2007-09-07 11:52:52 EDT
With the BRs/Requires for gstreamer-plugins-good(-devel) fixed, this looks good
to push.
Comment 9 Matthias Clasen 2007-09-07 12:15:45 EDT
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: cheese
Short Description: A webcam application for snapshots and movies
Owners: mclasen
Branches: 
InitialCC: 
Cvsextras Commits:
Comment 10 Matthias Clasen 2007-09-07 12:22:02 EDT
Operator error...
Comment 11 Kevin Fenzi 2007-09-07 14:42:25 EDT
cvs done.
Comment 12 Matthias Clasen 2007-09-07 22:15:24 EDT
built in rawhide now.

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