gnome-lirc-properties helps users set up infrared remote controls for use with the LIRC framework. No packages yet, it needs quite a bit of porting work.
Spec: http://people.redhat.com/bnocera/gnome-lirc-properties/gnome-lirc-properties.spec Source: http://people.redhat.com/bnocera/gnome-lirc-properties/gnome-lirc-properties-0.2.5-1.fc8.src.rpm
Updated packages: http://people.redhat.com/bnocera/gnome-lirc-properties/gnome-lirc-properties.spec http://people.redhat.com/bnocera/gnome-lirc-properties/gnome-lirc-properties-0.2.7-1.fc9.src.rpm Code patches are in (include support, resume irrecord support), remote DB is at a static location. Just missing some initscripts and sysconfig changes from bug 442341.
We also need the patch from http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=536811
I'm currently working my way through fixing upstream problems in gnome-lirc-properties. See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=530359 for details.
Updated packages: http://people.redhat.com/bnocera/gnome-lirc-properties/gnome-lirc-properties-0.2.8-1.fc9.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/bnocera/gnome-lirc-properties/gnome-lirc-properties.spec The only thing missing is a requires on a newer PolicyKit (which I built yesterday).
formal review: OK source files match upstream: 240068639dec59409f29b1b1ba881db557fcace8 gnome-lirc-properties-0.2.8.tar.gz OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines. OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. OK dist tag is present. OK build root is correct. OK license field matches the actual license. OK license is open source-compatible (GPLv2+). License text included in package. OK latest version is being packaged. OK BuildRequires are proper. N/A compiler flags are appropriate. OK %clean is present. OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64). N/A debuginfo package looks complete. BAD rpmlint is silent. OK final provides and requires look sane. N/A %check is present and all tests pass. OK no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. BAD owns the directories it creates. OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. OK no duplicates in %files. OK file permissions are appropriate. BAD scriptlets present. OK code, not content. OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. OK no headers. OK no pkgconfig files. OK no libtool .la droppings. BAD is a GUI app. bugs * %{_sysconfdir}/dbus-1/system.d/*.conf must be marked as %config * use %{_datadir}/omf/gnome-lirc-properties (the whole directory) in %files * desktop file not installed or validated (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files + some discussion on fedora-{devel,packaging} regarding the use of desktop-file-validate), calling desktop-file-validate should be sufficient in this case * the scriptlets need minor updates to fully comform the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets additional notes * occurrences of the string "g-l-p" could be replaced by %{name}, but this is only my opinion * call to autoconf can be replaced with autoreconf
(In reply to comment #6) > formal review: > <snip> > BAD rpmlint is silent. <snip> > BAD owns the directories it creates. <snip> > BAD scriptlets present. <snip> > BAD is a GUI app. > bugs > * %{_sysconfdir}/dbus-1/system.d/*.conf must be marked as %config It's not a configuration file, and it shouldn't be marked as %config, otherwise newer versions of gnome-lirc-properties might not launch the service properly. > * use %{_datadir}/omf/gnome-lirc-properties (the whole directory) in %files Done. > * desktop file not installed or validated > (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files + some > discussion on fedora-{devel,packaging} regarding the use of > desktop-file-validate), calling desktop-file-validate should be sufficient in > this case I'm not the one providing the desktop file, it's an upstream file. I can certainly add a validate call, but using install is useless, as we're not providing the desktop file ourselves. > * the scriptlets need minor updates to fully comform the > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets I removed the calls to update-desktop-database, as there's no mime-types in the desktop file. Rest is fixed. > additional notes > * occurrences of the string "g-l-p" could be replaced by %{name}, but this is > only my opinion I've replaced it where it matters. > * call to autoconf can be replaced with autoreconf I'd rather it be broken when a Makefile.am is updated and I forget to call it. Updated package: http://people.redhat.com/bnocera/gnome-lirc-properties/gnome-lirc-properties-0.2.8-2.fc9.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/bnocera/gnome-lirc-properties/gnome-lirc-properties.spec
> > bugs > > * %{_sysconfdir}/dbus-1/system.d/*.conf must be marked as %config > > It's not a configuration file, and it shouldn't be marked as %config, otherwise > newer versions of gnome-lirc-properties might not launch the service properly. OK, there is nothing specific in the Guidelines and some other packages mark such files as %config. An improvement to rpmlint will be required :-) > > * desktop file not installed or validated > > (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files + some > > discussion on fedora-{devel,packaging} regarding the use of > > desktop-file-validate), calling desktop-file-validate should be sufficient in > > this case > > I'm not the one providing the desktop file, it's an upstream file. I can > certainly add a validate call, but using install is useless, as we're not > providing the desktop file ourselves. Yes, that is correct only to validate the desktop when an upstream version is used. This PACKAGE is APPROVED.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: gnome-lirc-properties Short Description: Infrared Remote Controls setup tool Owners: hadess Branches: InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes
cvs done.
Bastian, you should close the bug after importing and building.
Forgot for some reason.