SPEC File: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/repo/go-home-applet.spec SRPM File: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/repo/go-home-applet-0.1ubuntu10-1.fc9.src.rpm This is one of five components needed to respin NetBookDora. This applet is a supercharged 'show desktop' applet that interacts with ume-launcher. Please note that this spec file is probably really bad.
Created attachment 309617 [details] spec file cleanup Attached is an initial patch to cleanup the spec file somewhat. With this the srpm created passes rpmlint. It probably needs some extra build reqs. You also need to change the name/email in the Changelog entry.
BTW not sure what the policy is with 'ubuntu' in the package name.
Scripts parse these tickets; please either use the submission template or keep the same format for the summary as the other review tickets.
Updated the spec file to make it comply with packaging guidelines better, as well as renamed to remove Ubuntu from the name. SPEC File: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/repo/go-home-applet.spec SRPM File: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/repo/go-home-applet-0.1.16-1.fc9.src.rpm Have spoken with Yaakov, and will likely co-maintain these packages.
Specified URL doesn't exist (No such resource) and it should be Source0 URL. Project URL is http://www.canonical.com/netbooks. But it seems that Canonical does not publish sources to download. So there is https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/intrepid/+source/go-home-applet/0.1-0ubuntu2/+files/go-home-applet_0.1.orig.tar.gz. We can use this as upstream 0.1 version and then apply attached patches.
The same rule apply to other Netbook packages - we may not use Ubuntu vendor specific modifications to source package (ubuntu2 postfix) as it is stated in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL.
I've been in touch with upstream, and there's a new release tarball due out next week so I'll wait before updating these packages until then. Also, upstream has said that they'll try and make more regular, formal releases to make our lives a little easier.
OK - finally got the new upstream release. Updated the package to this latest release, and fixed all the comments from the review so far: SPEC File: http://jonrob.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/go-home-applet.spec SRPM File: http://jonrob.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/go-home-applet-0.2.0-1.fc10.src.rpm
rpmlint warning: go-home-applet.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/go-home-applet.schemas correct it with %config %{_sysconfdir}/gconf/schemas/go-home-applet.schemas but then it triggers conffile-without-noreplace-flag warning
and from other packages with schemas it looks like you will need ad %preun section %preun export GCONF_CONFIG_SOURCE=`gconftool-2 --get-default-source` gconftool-2 --makefile-uninstall-rule %{_sysconfdir}/gconf/schemas/go-home-applet.schemas > /dev/null || : but I'm not sure about it... look at eg. totem's spec file
Should that warning not just be ignored, as in the case of this message: https://fcp.surfsite.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=threaded&order=ASC&topic_id=50619&forum=11&move=prev&topic_time=1201106053 Trying to find documentation on the correct way to handle .schemas files, but seems scant on the ground. Asking in IRC. will try mailing list next.
%config should help, other question is, if it should be noreplace. I don't think so, it's not manually edited config file and it has to be replaced when installing new package. It can be ignored.
No just mark them as config. They _need_ to be replaced on updates, otherwise you don't get the new default, or the new config entries set in the database.
Even marking them as config is questionable. Schema is not config file, it's more template for config files and should go to /usr/share.
Yeah, I'm getting mixed advice here! See Matthias message on devel... https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-October/msg02326.html Have updated the spec file, hopefully with correct pre, post etc but am testing now.
I've just looked at other packages which are packaging schema files and some are using config, some aren't. So we can ignore it at all. Correct usage of gconftool is more important currently. It's my opinion.
OK, that makes sense to me. I've updated the spec file, but I'm quite unsure of how these gconf bits are meant to work. Have uploaded it to the same location and hope somebody can shed some light for me. SPEC File: http://jonrob.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/go-home-applet.spec
IMO this package is not named properly: Should be gnome-applet-go-home with a provides for the upstream name, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28General.29
(In reply to comment #18) > IMO this package is not named properly: Should be gnome-applet-go-home with a > provides for the upstream name... Hmm, good point.
Is there still issue in this, or should the review be closed?
Closing as original requester not updated bug since initial request.