This package needs a review for inclusion into fedora. Spec and (s)rpm could be found: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/sim
can't see any SPEC/SRPM
Hi Marcela, + Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. + Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. + Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. + Rpmline output is sane. + Buildroot is correct (%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)) + Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. (GPLv2+) + Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. (4bc30577e619e05252d394d51dc20747) + Package must own all directories that it creates. + Package does not contain duplicates in %files. + Permissions on files are set properly. + Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} + Latest version is packaged. - Package does not compile in mock. You forgot to include autoconf and automake as BuildRequires, but also flex. w/o autotools: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=275886&name=build.log w/ autoools: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=275917&name=build.log Please fix these issues and let me know.
Hm, in f-8 it's ok, but in f-9 failed dependency http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=278293&name=root.log I think that's problem with new version of openssl and I've no other choice than wait for fixing BRs in these packages.
It's still failing due to missing kde config. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=315813&name=build.log
kde-config isn't missing, it wasn't found. I have something wrong in BR or configure.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=341480 Ha I've fixed it. The spec was missing kdelibs3, kdelibs3-devel wasn't enough. Please check it again.
I haven't looked at the details, but having to BuildRequires kdelibs3 seems wrong. Also you should post an url for the new srpm and spec file each time you make changes, the one I see seems old. There is not Source in this one, but maybe it is fixed in later ones.
[7] I have to run configure and then create tar ball. Then I don't need kdelibs3, but my source differs from source on the web page. So what's the correct solution?
(In reply to comment #8) > [7] I have to run configure and then create tar ball. Then I don't need > kdelibs3, but my source differs from source on the web page. So what's the > correct solution? Why do you need first run configure and then create a tar archive? Can resolved it with a patch?
Well yes, I can run configure and add to the patch created files ;-)
Hm, somehow fixed itself. Now is it ok. http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/sim/
Why the autoconf run? This shouldn't be needed? And the corresponding patch shouldn't be applied. Also it seems to me that make -f admin/Makefile.common and make -C plugins/remote clean # what the hell... are not needed (and certainly harmful). xdg-open should be used instead of htmlview in the patch. It should be a Requires. Why isn't the gkrellm subpackage always built? The desktop_file shouldn't be conditional, but always true. %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT should be used, not both. for desktop-file-install, vendor should be fedora, and Application category is wrong. Also no need for mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_datadir}/applications if you use the file in that directory... In the rm commands, -r is in general not needed since these are files. I would suggest also not using -f since this allows to find when things have changed.
There is one file under GPLv2 only, so the whole is GPLv2.
Do you know how fix this? I'm looking on this issue ages :( make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/sim-0.9.4.3' + desktop-file-install --vendor fedora --dir /var/tmp/sim-0.9.4.3-1.fc8-root-root/usr/share/applications/kde/sim.desktop Must specify one or more desktop files to install
The command in the spec file looks good. What command did you use in Comment #14?
desktop-file-install --vendor fedora \ --dir ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/applications/kde/sim.desktop files -f %{name}.lang %{_datadir}/applications/fedora-sim.desktop The whole spec is on: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/sim/
Sorry for the delay, I'm back to life :) Where can I find the SRPM of this package?
ping :)
I reinstall my computer and forgot to archive sim in non home directory :( But I've started again with upstream spec file.
http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/sim/
I'm maintain this package for my rpm-repository for long time. For example for Fedora 9 builds located here: http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora9/sim/ If you have nothing against, I wish maintain it for Fedora community.
@Marek Interested in continuing review? @Marcela - your call on #21 Thanks,
I remember I had to have a look at this, but currently I am very busy, but if this moves on I could have a look in the next weeks.
^comment 21 That's great. I have already too many packages. I'll be happy when you maintain it.
@Marcela Maslanova, very thanks. @Patrice Dumas, please wait to review, I'm update files shortly.
(In reply to comment #25) > @Marcela Maslanova, very thanks. > > @Patrice Dumas, please wait to review, I'm update files shortly. You should open a new review and close this one as a duplicate.
Ok, I do that.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 461131 ***