Spec URL: http://dl.free.fr/iWoKmtpoj/adonthell.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.free.fr/o4pMN1LvT/adonthell-0.3.4-0.6.fc8.src.rpm (this is a french host server, click on "Télécharger ce fichier" to download the files) Description: A 2D, graphical, single player role playing game inspired by good old console RPGs from the SNES like Secret of Mana or Chrono Trigger. This package contains the Adonthell engine. You will also need a game package to play Adonthell. For this release, the official package is Waste's Edge. Notes: 1. This is my first package submission :) 2. rpmlint runs fine, except for the adonthell-doc package: $ rpmlint RPMS/i386/adonthell-doc-0.3.4-0.6.fc8.i386.rpm adonthell-doc.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/adonthell-doc-0.3.4/html/classmapsquare__area__coll__graph.map (same thing for a few other files) I am not very familiar with doxygen, so I don't know if those files can be safely removed or not... 3. Something is bugging me: the adonthell-debuginfo package does not depend on the adonthell package. Isn't that a problem? Did I forget something? 4. This is only a game engine, I'll submit a second package for Waste's Edge, which is a game using the Adonthell engine (I'll add a link to the other submission in the comments, might be better if the two were reviewed simultaneously).
This package is needed for the one I submitted in bug 441415 (as I said in the submission)
Rebuild failed on dist-f9 (I just tried to rebuild this package and did not do anything else!) http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=569167
In fact I did not try to build it on dist-f9 as it wasn't released yet and I don't have an available machine for tests (not even virtualization). I'll try to build it in Fedora 9 as soon as I can. By the way, I thought review for inclusion in F8 and F9 were 2 different processes, that's why I submitted it after having built it in only F8. Sorry about that.
(In reply to comment #3) > In fact I did not try to build it on dist-f9 as it wasn't released yet and I > don't have an available machine for tests (not even virtualization). Rebuild fails also on dist-f8-updates-candidate: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=570219
The path for python is hardcoded in the configure script (with /lib, not /lib64) so it doesn't build on 64 bits system. This should be fixed with this new spec file: http://dl.free.fr/jFioGRj4k/adonthell.spec And btw, this might make it build on F9 as well, but I still can't test it before next week.
Please also provide srpm. And would you place your spec/srpm on the URL from which we can directly download your files by "wget -N", for example?
I just checked, and the URL I provided for spec/SRPM are the one from which you can directly download the files. However, when you open it for the first time in a session, the web host will intercept your request and redirect you to the download page you saw. Try to open the same URL again, and you will access the files... Dumb host -_- I'm really sorry about that, but I do not know about any other free web host. Do you know one? Anyway, here is the SRPM: http://dl.free.fr/fjr1hvFRD/adonthell-0.3.4-0.7.fc8.src.rpm (still the same host, until I can find a better one... :S)
I finally found someone to host the files (thanks go to TeeWee). Here they are, more easily accessible :) SPEC: http://fedora.c-bien.fr/adonthell.spec SRPM: http://fedora.c-bien.fr/adonthell-0.3.4-0.7.fc8.src.rpm
Some comments: * As far as I checked the tarball, the license tag should be "GPLv2+". * The explicit Requires: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Requires: SDL Requires: python Requires: zlib Requires: freetype Requires: SDL_mixer ------------------------------------------------------------------ should all be removed. These library related Reqires are automatically checked and added to binary rpms by rpmbuild itself. * Fedora specific compilation flags (you can check this by $ rpm --eval %optflags) are not correctly honored: the section "Compiler flags" of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines * Please check directory ownership issue ------------------------------------------------------------------ [root@localhost ~]# LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/share/adonthell/modules/adonthell.pyc adonthell-0.3.4-0.7.fc9.i386 [root@localhost ~]# LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/share/adonthell file /usr/share/adonthell is not owned by any package [root@localhost ~]# LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/share/adonthell/modules/ file /usr/share/adonthell/modules is not owned by any package ------------------------------------------------------------------ Note: When you write ------------------------------------------------------------------ %files %{_datadir}/%{name}/ ------------------------------------------------------------------ This contains the directory %_datadir/%name itself and all files/directories/etc under the directory, while ------------------------------------------------------------------ %files %dir %{_datadir}/%{name} ------------------------------------------------------------------ contains the directory %{_datadir}/%name only.
Hi Mathieu, Short intro: I'm a long time Fedora contributer and a sponsor. I haven't been sponsoring anyone in a while as I've been rather busy with other stuff. But getting new people into Fedora is important so I've decided to make some time for sponsering again. Most of the things I do within Fedora are gaming related so I'm very happy to see adonthell getting packaged. As such I would like to sponsor you. The first step here would be to finish up the packaging of adonthell and wastesedge so that they are in a state where they can be approved. The next step then is for you to either package one or two more packages, for example from these lists: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Games/WishList http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/WishList Or you can do some reviews of other people packages, when you do this please add a note that it is not an official review as you aren't a contributer yet. The purpose here is for you to show a good understanding of the packaging guidelines. Once you've done a couple of good reviews and / or submitted one or two more good packages, then you can apply for cvsextras membership in the account system and I'll sponsor you. As for the review of this package, Mamoru has done a fine job so far, please fix all the items he has mentioned in his last comment and then I'll do a full review pointing out any last issues.
ping?
Sorry for spending so much time without any answer, I've been battling since then with the compilation flags. I think I finally found something out (they were hardcoded in configure.in), but I now have a problem with the configure not finding python. Python is in fact in /usr/lib64/python2.5/ on my system (default python install with yum) and the configure script is looking fot it in /usr/%{_lib}/python$PYLIBVER, that is /usr/lib64/python (as the env var is not set). This causes rpmbuild to fail, however, I didn't have this problem on Fedora 9 preview :S All the problems you noted should be corrected, but this one is really giving me troubles... I'll post the new spec and srpm when I could fix this. Sorry for the delay and thanks for being so patient :)
It's been a long time, but here it is. I worked some time with upstreal dev and we managed to fix some issues in adonthell, as well as some issues in my own spec. The result is the 0.3.5 release (which also includes lots of bugfixes for non Fedora-related issues). I think it should now cover what you remarked above. Here is the spec file: ftp://91.121.156.173/pub/adonthell.spec Here is the SRPM: ftp://91.121.156.173/pub/adonthell-0.3.5-0.1.fc9.src.rpm PS: I now have my own host, so you will not have to click through the ads to find the files ;)
Looks good, I've done a full review, here are the results: Must Fix -------- * Currently you do: "sed -i 's|^CFLAGS|^#CFLAGS|g' configure.in" Make that: "sed -i 's|^CFLAGS|^#CFLAGS|g' configure" By modifying configure.in instead of configure, you are causing all the autoxxx files to be regenerated and configure being run twice once you've changed the sed, you can also drop the BuildRequires libtool. as that then won't be needed anymore either. * Currently in the description you say: "inspired by good old console RPGs from the SNES like Secret of Mana or Chrono Trigger." This contains several references to protected Trademarks, please don't do that instaed just write (for example): "inspired by good old console RPGs from the 16 bit console gaming era" Should Fix: ----------- * The following BuildRequires are redundant and thus should be removed: zlib-devel, SDL-devel So all in all the package is almost good to go, what remains is really easy to fix. So the next step is to update your wastesedge candidate package to 0.3.5 (I assume that together with adonthell 0.3.5 there also has been a 0.3.5 wastesedge release) and then I'll review that next. Also it would help if that could happen somewhat faster then the times between steps taken in this review.
"By modifying configure.in instead of configure, you are causing all the autoxxx files to be regenerated and configure being run twice" Wow! It's been bugging me a lot and I couldn't understand why it was running twice. Anyway, fixed the 3 issues. SPEC: ftp://91.121.156.173/pub/adonthell.spec SRPM: ftp://91.121.156.173/pub/adonthell-0.3.5-0.2.fc9.src.rpm About wastesedge, it was not yet released in 0.3.5 but it doesn't matter as it remains fully compatible (only minor version changing). Translations are being worked on for Waste's Edge, and upstream wants to wait for those before releasing it. I am currently applying all the comments you made here to wastesedge.rpm, so you might want to wait a little before reviewing it so I can upload new versions of SPEC and SRPM ;)
(In reply to comment #15) > "By modifying configure.in instead of configure, you are causing all > the autoxxx files to be regenerated and configure being run twice" > Wow! It's been bugging me a lot and I couldn't understand why it was running twice. > > Anyway, fixed the 3 issues. > SPEC: ftp://91.121.156.173/pub/adonthell.spec > SRPM: ftp://91.121.156.173/pub/adonthell-0.3.5-0.2.fc9.src.rpm > Looks fine now! > About wastesedge, it was not yet released in 0.3.5 but it doesn't matter as it > remains fully compatible (only minor version changing). Translations are being > worked on for Waste's Edge, and upstream wants to wait for those before > releasing it. > Ok. > I am currently applying all the comments you made here to wastesedge.rpm, so you > might want to wait a little before reviewing it so I can upload new versions of > SPEC and SRPM ;) Ok, let me know when you've got a version of wastesedge ready for review.
I added the -p option to the install call, as indicated in the wastesedge submission. SPEC: ftp://ks359320.kimsufi.com/pub/adonthell.spec SRPM: ftp://ks359320.kimsufi.com/pub/adonthell-0.3.5-0.3.fc9.src.rpm
Sponsored, approved!
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: adonthell Short Description: A 2D graphical RPG game Owners: bochecha Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes
cvs done.