Spec URL: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3.spec SRPM URL: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3-3.4.0-1.fc8.src.rpm Description: Glade is a RAD tool to enable quick and easy development of user interfaces for the GTK+ toolkit and the GNOME desktop environment. The user interfaces designed in Glade are saved as XML, which can be used in numerous programming languages including C, C++, Java, Perl, Python, C#, Pike, Ruby, Haskell, Objective Caml and Scheme. Adding support for other languages is easy too. Glade-3 is meant for GTK+ 2.8 or newer.
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=228611
*** Bug 177747 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
rpath error on a x86_64 system. $ rpmbuild --rebuild glade3-3.4.0-1.fc8.src.rpm <snip> ERROR 0001: file '/usr/lib64/glade3/modules/libgladegnome.so' contains a standard rpath '/usr/lib64' in [/usr/lib64] ERROR 0001: file '/usr/lib64/glade3/modules/libgladegtk.so' contains a standard rpath '/usr/lib64' in [/usr/lib64] ERROR 0001: file '/usr/bin/glade-3' contains a standard rpath '/usr/lib64' in [/usr/lib64] </snip> an be fixed by adding # remove rpath chrpath --delete $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/glade3/modules/libgladegnome.so chrpath --delete $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/glade3/modules/libgladegtk.so chrpath --delete $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/glade-3 to %install and adding BuildRequires: chrpath http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-7cea8c7aa96400a4687e843156354476434ff883
(In reply to comment #3) > rpath error on a x86_64 system. Shall fix it. Thanks for pointing this out. Strange I don't get it on i386 even after following all the necessary RPath precautions. By the way, would it not make good sense for Koji to use: %__arch_install_post /usr/lib/rpm/check-rpaths /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot Otherwise it would be very difficult to catch such errors which only surface on one particular.
Spec: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3.spec SRPM: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3-3.4.0-2.fc8.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=229664
Although Glade-3 is basically licensed under GPLv2+, some artwork in the form of PNG files is under LGPLv2. This is explained in COPYING and the two licenses are provided as COPYING.GPL and COPYING.LGPLv2. Thus glade3-libglade is "GPLv2+ and LGPLv2" while the others (ie., glade3 and glade3-libgladeui-devel) are "GPLv2+". To avoid confusion I have included COPYING, COPYING.GPL and COPYING.LGPL in glade3-libgladeui, which is multiply licensed, while COPYING.GPL is provided in all the rest of the GPLv2+ sub-packages. I hope this is correct.
In my opinion we should obsolete glade-2, if glade-3 supports glade-2. If not, leave.
As far as i remember ther is some differences, so i don't think it is a good idea to obsolete glade2, they can work perfectly together.
http://glade.gnome.org/ says: "It has a few useful new features ... and respects the same XML format as glade-2." http://www.gnomejournal.org/article/50/glade-3-sees-the-light-of-day says: "No pain switching tools: this new Glade tool ... is fully compatible with the libglade format and reads Glade files generated by Glade 2 like a champ." Or did you mean something more/else by the word "supports". Yes, as Tim says, this glade3 package can be safely installed alongside Fedora's glade2 package.
Some more fixes. Spec: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3.spec SRPM: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3-3.4.0-3.fc8.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=255166 There are some "unused-direct-shlib-dependency" issues with the -libgladeui subpackage. Most of these libraries seem to be pulled in by the configure script since they are needed by the other sub-packages to build. /lib/libdl.so.2 is not directly used but through /usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so. $ rpmlint glade3-libgladeui glade3-libgladeui.i386: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/libgladeui-1.so.7.0.1 /usr/lib/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 glade3-libgladeui.i386: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/libgladeui-1.so.7.0.1 /usr/lib/libpango-1.0.so.0 glade3-libgladeui.i386: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/libgladeui-1.so.7.0.1 /lib/libdl.so.2 glade3-libgladeui.i386: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/libgladeui-1.so.7.0.1 /lib/libgthread-2.0.so.0 glade3-libgladeui.i386: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/libgladeui-1.so.7.0.1 /lib/librt.so.1 Can we ignore these warnings?
Spec: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3.spec SRPM: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3-3.4.0-4.fc8.src.rpm
I will review this it. $ rpmlint glade3-3.4.0-4.fc8.src.rpm $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/glade3-3.4.0-4.fc8.i386.rpm $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/glade3-libgladeui-3.4.0-4.fc8.i386.rpm $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/glade3-libgladeui-devel-3.4.0-4.fc8.i386.rpm $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/glade3-debuginfo-3.4.0-4.fc8.i386.rpm * rpmlint silent for all rpms. b9dc4e75836462db272da5c200fd3e8d /home/tim/rpmbuild/SOURCES/glade3-3.4.0.tar.gz b9dc4e75836462db272da5c200fd3e8d glade3-3.4.0.tar.gz * source match upstream
MUST: * package is named appropriately * it is legal for Fedora to distribute this * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * specfile name matches %{name} * summary and description fine * correct buildroot * %{?dist} is used * license text included in package and marked with %doc * package meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/) * changelog format fine * Packager tag not used * Vendor tag not used * Distribution tag not used * License used and not Copyright * Summary tag does not end in a period * specfile is legible * package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86 * make sure lines are <= 80 characters * specfile written in American English * no -doc sub-package necessary * /sbin/ldconfig used in packages containing libraries. * rpath is removed. * GUI app, has .desktop file and uses desktop-file-install to install it. * header files goes into -devel sub-package. * *.so goes into -devel sub-package. * devel package require the base package using a fully versioned dependency * *.la files is deleted. * macros used appropriately and consistently * no %makeinstall * install section must begin with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot} * The spec file handles locales properly (%find_lang ) * split Requires(pre,post) into two separate lines * package not relocatable * package contains code * package owns all directories and files * no %files duplicates * %defattrs present ( %defattr(-, root, root, -)) * %clean present * %doc files do not affect runtime
SHOULD: * package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc * package should build on i386 ? package should build in mock - I haven't tried, but it build in koji.
Created attachment 268591 [details] Final requires & provides.
PROBLEMS: MUST : Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). Fix this and it is APPROVED.
(In reply to comment #16) > PROBLEMS: > MUST : Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for > directory ownership and usability). I had kept it initially, but removed it later since gtk2-devel pulls in pkgconfig. Should it be kept explicitly for readability, since the guidelines say so?
(In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #16) > > > PROBLEMS: > > MUST : Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for > > directory ownership and usability). > > I had kept it initially, but removed it later since gtk2-devel pulls in > pkgconfig. Should it be kept explicitly for readability, since the guidelines > say so? Yes, i think so
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: glade3 Short Description: User Interface Designer for GTK+ and GNOME Owners: rishi Branches: F-7 F-8 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: no
Spec: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3.spec SRPM: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/glade3-3.4.0-4.fc8.src.rpm I have put back 'Requires: pkgconfig' for -libgladeui-devel.
cvs done.
Glad you packaged it :) .