Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.6.5-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: pfstools is a set of command line and GUI programs for reading, writing, manipulating and viewing high-dynamic range (HDR) images and video frames. All programs in the package exchange data using unix pipes and a simple generic HDR image format (pfs). The concept of the pfstools is similar to netpbm package for low-dynamic range images. The RPM is split into a number of subpackages to avoid pulling in dependencies.
Anybody going to volunteer?
Expect a review soon.
There are rpm build errors: RPM build errors: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/pfstools-1.6.5-2.fc10.x86_64/usr/bin/pfsinppm File not found: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/pfstools-1.6.5-2.fc10.x86_64/usr/bin/pfsoutppm --> these two files do not seem to be built File listed twice: /usr/libexec/octave/3.0.1/site/oct/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/pfstools/pfsclose.oct File listed twice: /usr/libexec/octave/3.0.1/site/oct/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/pfstools/pfsget.oct File listed twice: /usr/libexec/octave/3.0.1/site/oct/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/pfstools/pfsopen.oct File listed twice: /usr/libexec/octave/3.0.1/site/oct/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/pfstools/pfsput.oct File listed twice: /usr/libexec/octave/3.0.1/site/oct/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/pfstools/pfsread.oct File listed twice: /usr/libexec/octave/3.0.1/site/oct/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/pfstools/pfstransform_colorspace.oct File listed twice: /usr/libexec/octave/3.0.1/site/oct/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu/pfstools/pfswrite.oct --> %{_libexecdir}/octave/*/site/oct/*/pfstools/*.oct must be removed
The missing files are built if netpbm-devel is added as BR. There are also a couple of other issues: rpmlint of pfstools-glview: pfstools-glview.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot GL-based viewer for HDR files. pfstools-glview.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsglview ['/usr/lib64'] rpmlint of pfstools-imgmagick: pfstools-imgmagick.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot ImageMagick file import for PFS tools. pfstools-imgmagick.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsinimgmagick ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools-imgmagick.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsoutimgmagick ['/usr/lib64'] rpmlint of pfstools-octave: pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_write_rgb.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_read_luminance.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_close_frames.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfsview.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfsview_rgb.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_read_rgb.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_read_xyz.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_open_frames.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfsview_list.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfssize.m pfstools-octave.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot Octave interaction with PFS tools. rpmlint of pfstools-devel: pfstools-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation pfstools-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on pfstools/pfstools-libs/libpfstools pfstools-devel.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot Files for development with PFS tools. rpmlint of pfstools-exr: pfstools-exr.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot EXR file import for PFS tools. pfstools-exr.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsoutexr ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools-exr.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsinexr ['/usr/lib64'] rpmlint of pfstools-qt: pfstools-qt.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot Qt-based viewer for HDR files. pfstools-qt.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsview ['/usr/lib64'] rpmlint of pfstools-libs: pfstools-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation pfstools-libs.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot Libraries for HDR processing. pfstools-libs.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPLv2.1 rpmlint of pfstools: pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsflip ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsabsolute ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsextractchannels ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfspad ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsoutpfm ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfssize ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsclamp ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsrotate ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfspanoramic ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsoutppm ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsouttiff ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsinpfm ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsgamma ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfscut ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsinrgbe ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsoutrgbe ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsinppm ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfsintiff ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfscat ['/usr/lib64'] pfstools.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/pfstag ['/usr/lib64'] In addition to the above, some packages seem to include GUI tools, so desktop file[s] should be provided and you have forgottem to package the license file.
Created attachment 315654 [details] modified spec this spec fixes the missing BRs, removes some duplicate files and preserves timestamps
@Ulrich As soon as you update srpm on above issues. I will start my review. Thanks,
I've updated the SPEC file with the proposed changes and a few more.
May you upload your srpm also?
There is a new file: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.6.5-2.fc9.src.rpm
rpmlint is still not clean. May you explain, if there are certain warnings which you are really ignoring and why ? Thanks, [rpmbuild@rocky i386]$ rpmlint -i pfstools-libs-1.6.5-2.fc9.i386.rpm pfstools-libs.i386: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. pfstools-libs.i386: W: invalid-license LGPLv2.1 [rpmbuild@rocky i386]$ rpmlint pfstools-octave-1.6.5-2.fc9.i386.rpm pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_write_rgb.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_read_luminance.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_read_xyz.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_close_frames.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfsview.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfsview_rgb.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_read_rgb.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfs_open_frames.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfsview_list.m pfstools-octave.i386: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/octave/3.0.1/site/m/pfstools/pfssize.m 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 10 errors, 0 warnings. [rpmbuild@rocky i386]$ rpmlint -i pfstools-devel-1.6.5-2.fc9.i386.rpm pfstools-devel.i386: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. pfstools-devel.i386: W: no-dependency-on pfstools/pfstools-libs/libpfstools 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Package builds successfully. Waiting for update on above comment. Thanks,
ping
I've been travelling the last weeks. Will get to it ASAP.
I've uploaded a new .spec file and .src.rpm. Sorry for the delay, too many things happening at the same time. http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.6.5-3.fc9.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools.spec When I run rpmlint I still get some warning: $ rpmlint -i RPMS/x86_64/pfstools*-1.6.5-3.fc9.x86_64.rpm pfstools-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. pfstools-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. 9 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. These should be fine. The documentation files for the -libs and -devel package are the same as for the main package. No need to duplicate them.
I had to been shifting to another place ... sorry for delay on my side ... I will get back to it in a day with complete review.
Fails build http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=896281 [rpmbuild@rocky i386]$ rpmls * | grep faq [rpmbuild@rocky i386]$ rpmls * | grep pfs_format_spec.pdf [rpmbuild@rocky i386]$ documentation is still now included. Please updated with doc folder funde installed. rpmlint tells me some packages need docu.
*now=>not, updated=>update, funde=>files *tpyo erorr, I am durnck ;-)
[I'm traveling again...] (In reply to comment #17) > *now=>not, updated=>update, funde=>files > *tpyo erorr, I am durnck ;-) Not a good to refer to kajo data, it gets removed at ta short while. I didn't see it. Re the documentation: I added some more files but they really are not necessary. As I said before, it's stupid on rpmlint's part to insist on doc files for all these packages. The -libs subpackage still doesn't have any but this is just fine. There is nothing to say. Anybody who needs to know more will find the main package, pfstools, and read the docs there. Find the latest srpm and spec file here: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.6.5-4.fc9.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools.spec
I never did a complete review. It failed at that time, to build. Reason: + /bin/cat /builddir/build/SOURCES/pfstools-mDATA.patch + /usr/bin/patch -s -p1 -b --suffix .mDATA --fuzz=0 + aclocal /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.DDk9s1: line 41: aclocal: command not found error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.DDk9s1 (%prep) RPM build errors: Misses buildrequire automake. I will do a complete review shortly. Thanks,
APPROVED fix the missing buildrequire.
I've added the one BuildRequres. This means I should be ready to uild it for the distribution. Thanks for the review. http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.6.5-5.fc10.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools.spec
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: pfstools Short Description: Programs for handling high-dynamic range images Owners: drepper Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 InitialCC:
I've updated to the most recent upstream release: http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.7.0-1.fc10.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools.spec One more subpackage is build and I added the appropriate new BuildRequires.
cvs done.
pfstools-1.7.0-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pfstools-1.7.0-2.fc9
pfstools-1.7.0-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pfstools-1.7.0-2.fc10
pfstools-1.7.0-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
pfstools-1.7.0-2.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.