Spec URL: <spec info here> SRPM URL: <srpm info here> Description: A simple maze game for the XO laptop. You can play by yourself or race to solve it with your buddies. Up to 3 people can play on a single XO laptop and lots more can play when shared over the network.
again, sorry Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze-6-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: A simple maze game for the XO laptop. You can play by yourself or race to solve it with your buddies. Up to 3 people can play on a single XO laptop and lots more can play when shared over the network. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=889260 fab@localhost noarch]$ rpmlint -i sugar-maze-6-1.fc10.noarch.rpm sugar-maze.noarch: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid. Valid groups are: "Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving", "Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases", "Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering", "Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia", "Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System", "Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers", "Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System", "Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support". [fab@localhost SRPMS]$ rpmlint -i sugar-maze-6-1.fc10.src.rpm sugar-maze.src: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid. Valid groups are: "Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving", "Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases", "Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering", "Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia", "Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System", "Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers", "Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System", "Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support". 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Couple of things: OK - Package name OK - License info is accurate OK - License tag is correct and licenses are approved OK - License files are installed as %doc OK - Specfile name OK - Specfile is legible OK - No prebuilt binaries included OK - BuildRoot value (one of the recommended values) OK - PreReq not used ?? - Source md5sum matches upstream - Any chance of working with upstream to get the tarball pushed to http://dev.laptop.org/pub/sugar/sources/. Barring that can you modify the checkout to use a snapshot (http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=activities/maze;a=snapshot;h=ffdbd8e3232ad67a6a99134f1252c76a81dbe000) OK - No hardcoded pathnames OK - Package owns all the files it installs OK - 'Requires' create needed unowned directories OK - BuildRequires sufficient OK - File permissions set properly OK - Macro usage is consistent ?? - rpmlint is silent - rpmlint on the srpm shows this (the last 3 are worriesome) sugar-maze.src: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities sugar-maze.src: W: strange-permission sugar-maze-checkout.sh 0755 sugar-maze.src: W: strange-permission Maze-6.tar.bz2 0755 sugar-maze.src: W: strange-permission sugar-maze.spec 0755
I've reported upstream about the tarball. I think that it will be really hard to get one because on most activities pages are no contact details about how to get in touch with the developer, no direct link to the bugtracking system, no proper entry (and some times no entry) in the bugtracking system, or no action from upstream in the past months. Let's give them some time.
No action from upstream for a week. To be honest, I see no benefit to work with the snapshot tarball. I would like to suggest that we work with the checkout from git till release tarballs are available. Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze-6-2.fc10.src.rpm
I tried installing the resulting RPM on my sugar VM.. and it failed do to not having a Requires: pygame. Please check the required imports and post an updated spec / src rpm.
Bryan, thanks for your check and the hint about the requirement. Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze-6-3.fc10.src.rpm
I attempted to install it on the latest sugar build, and I am getting the following error: Fatal Python error: (pygame parachute) Segmentation Fault Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/sugar-activity", line 21, in <module> main.main() File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sugar/activity/main.py", line 103, in main module = __import__(module_name) File "/usr/share/sugar/activities/Maze.activity/activity.py", line 1, in <module> import olpcgames File "/usr/share/sugar/activities/Maze.activity/olpcgames/__init__.py", line 37, in <module> from olpcgames import camera File "/usr/share/sugar/activities/Maze.activity/olpcgames/camera.py", line 12, in <module> import gst File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/gst-0.10/gst/__init__.py", line 170, in <module> from _gst import * RuntimeError: can't initialize module gst: Error re-scanning registry , child terminated by signal
The above was from a rawhids build of sugar. Using a pure F10 build (f10, f10updates and f10-testing) I get 1228251405.415884 WARNING root: Activity directory lacks a MANIFEST file. Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/sugar-activity", line 21, in <module> main.main() File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/sugar/activity/main.py", line 100, in main module = __import__(module_name) File "/usr/share/sugar/activities/Maze.activity/activity.py", line 1, in <module> import olpcgames File "/usr/share/sugar/activities/Maze.activity/olpcgames/__init__.py", line 38, in <module> from olpcgames import pangofont File "/usr/share/sugar/activities/Maze.activity/olpcgames/pangofont.py", line 18, in <module> from olpcgames import _cairoimage ImportError: cannot import name _cairoimage
Hmmm, I think python-olpcgames is needed for this.
Fabian, Where do we stand on this one? Steven
python-olpcgames is still missing. I guess that I will do this package by myself.
python-olpcgames is on the way.
Here are the updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc12.src.rpm
Bryan, what's our status here? Do you still plan to review this or should I take it over?
reassigning to Sebastian
Sorry.. went to look at the rpm is not there. Could you please post the srpm? -- bk
Assigning back to Bryan; thanks for being around. ;) Fabian, could you please upload the SRPM, too?
Here is the file SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/XO/sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc12.src.rpm
Ping?
Reviewed the comments from before, and they look good. I installed this on a blueberry VM, and it installed fine. Review Approved.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: sugar-maze Short Description: Maze for Sugar Branches: F-11 F-12 InitialCC:
That CVS request is missing an owner field. Who should own this package? Also, don't forget to request an F-13 branch.
Sorry, again... New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: sugar-maze Short Description: Maze for Sugar Owners: fab Branches: F-11 F-12 F-13 InitialCC:
CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc12
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc13
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc11
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update sugar-maze'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F13/FEDORA-2010-2862
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update sugar-maze'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-2947
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update sugar-maze'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2010-2949
Could you push this one to stable, please? :)
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
sugar-maze-0-0.4.20091227.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.