Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/semi.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/semi-1.14.6-1.fc10.src.rpm RPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/semi-1.14.6-1.fc10.noarch.rpm Description: SEMI is a library to provide MIME feature for GNU Emacs. MIME is a proposed internet standard for including content and headers other than (ASCII) plain text in messages. Wanderlust mail client requires this library to render messages. SEMI + Wanderlust are my first packages for Fedora.
Is there a dependency between this and Wanderlust? If so, one of these tickets should block the other.
Yes, Wanderlust requires SEMI.
Hi! Unfortunately, I'm not a reviewer... But according to the instructions, I need to show some interest in reviewing other requests in order to get a sponsor. So I'll do that. Please feel free to do the same for me, my request is bug 471575 :-) For me, rpmlint gives the following semi.src: E: no-buildroot-tag semi.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 15, tab: line 2) semi.src: W: non-standard-group Unspecified semi.src: W: invalid-license GPL My mock build bails out, complaining about the missing Group: field. I think all of these issues should be closed. Copyright & license. Most (all?) files have a nice GPLv2 copyright notice. However, the I really miss the top-level file COPYING - the notices refer to this. I think it should be part of the package. See more below > #%define _default_patch_fuzz 2 > %define _semiver 1.14.6 > %define _flimver 1.14.8 > %define _emacsver 22.2 > > %define _lispdir %{_datadir}/emacs/site-lisp > > Summary: Library to provide MIME feature for GNU Emacs > Name: semi > Version: %{_semiver} > Release: 1%{?dist} > License: GPL > #Group: Applications/Internet As lint says, there need to be a valid group and license tag. As for license, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing - I think it boils down to GPLv2. For Group:, take a look at http://koti.welho.com/vskytta/packagers-handbook/packagers-handbook.html#guidelines-group-tag > URL: ftp://ftp.m17n.org/pub/mule/semi/semi-1.14-for-flim-1.14 > Source0: ftp://ftp.m17n.org/pub/mule/semi/semi-1.14-for-flim-1.14/semi-%{version}.tar.bz2 Unfortunately, these are password protected. > BuildRequires: emacs >= %{_emacsver}, flim >= %{_flimver} > BuildArch: noarch > Requires: emacs >= %{_emacsver}, flim >= %{_flimver} > > Patch1: semi-001-use-w3m-instead-of-w3.patch > > %description > SEMI is a library to provide MIME feature for GNU Emacs. MIME is a > proposed internet standard for including content and headers other than > (ASCII) plain text in messages [nit-picking] This was written some time ago... Isn't it fair these days to say that MIME is the way to handle content on Internet? > > %prep > > %setup -q -n semi-%{version} > %patch1 -p1 > > # necessary to generate the auto-autoloads.el file: > touch *.el > > %build > > %install > > rm -rf %buildroot > > %{__mkdir_p} %buildroot%{_lispdir}/semi > > cd $RPM_BUILD_DIR/semi-%{version} > > make LISPDIR=%buildroot%{_lispdir} > make LISPDIR=%buildroot%{_lispdir} install > > make clean Why make clean here? If all goes well, %clean will take care of it. If not, I think we want everything. Or am I missing something? > > %clean > rm -rf %buildroot > > %files > %defattr(-,root,root) > %doc NEWS README* ChangeLog SEMI* TODO VERSION > %{_lispdir}/semi > > %changelog > > * Fri Nov 7 2008 Vitaly Mayatskikh <vmayatsk> [1.14.6-1] > - first build > Cheers! --alec
Reading the Review Guidelines once more, I realize that my proposal just to add the COPYING file wasn't that good. What needs to be done is to try to get upstream to do this. But I don't know if it's feasible, and anyway I think you need advice by someone more experienced than me about this. I have already been wrong once :-)
#%define _default_patch_fuzz 2 > %define _semiver 1.14.6 > %define _flimver 1.14.8 > %define _emacsver 22.2 > > %define _lispdir %{_datadir}/emacs/site-lisp You should not use _* as a macro name - these are by convention reserved for "system" macros. Use semiver, flimver, emacsver and lispdir instead. Sorry I missed that.
Thanks for your comments, Alec!
Was an updated package ever released which addressed those comments?
Yes, half a year ago. I've added one more patch to semi and updated packages.
Where are the updated packages? The spec URL is valid, but none of the package links exist. Anyway, have you seen the emacs packaging guidelines? From a quick inspection of the spec file, this package doesn't seem to follow them. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Emacs
Thanks for pointing the guidline, I've repackaged semi and wl (bz 470525). Links: http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/semi.spec http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/emacs-semi-1.14.6-1.fc11.noarch.rpm http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/emacs-semi-el-1.14.6-1.fc11.noarch.rpm http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/emacs-semi-1.14.6-1.fc11.src.rpm
The spec file and package name should be the same. I just note for the record that both semi and wl were formerly in Fedora Core.
Updated http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/emacs-semi.spec http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/emacs-semi-1.14.6-1.fc12.noarch.rpm http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/emacs-semi-el-1.14.6-1.fc12.noarch.rpm http://people.redhat.com/vmayatsk/wl/emacs-semi-1.14.6-1.fc12.src.rpm
Rebuild of packages in Comment #12 inside mock succeeds. rpmlint output on resulting rpms: emacs-semi.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog [1.14.6-1] ['1.14.6-1.fc14', '1.14.6-1'] --> Needs fixing emacs-semi.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/emacs-semi-1.14.6/ChangeLog emacs-semi.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/emacs-semi-1.14.6/README.en emacs-semi.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/emacs-semi-1.14.6/VERSION ---> These need fixing using iconv in %prep emacs-semi.noarch: W: empty-%post emacs-semi.noarch: W: empty-%preun ---> Remove these sections emacs-semi-el.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Elisp -> Lisp, Elise, Elisa emacs-semi-el.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US elisp -> lisp, e lisp, Elise ---> False positives, safe to ignore emacs-semi-el.noarch: W: no-documentation ---> False positive, ignore 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.
Also, the spec file needs updating to comply with the latest Emacs add-on packaging guidelines. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Emacs Specifically, these changes need to be made to the spec file. 1/ the pkgconfig stuff can be removed 2/the emacs specific macros need to be changed accordingly eg %{emacs_version} should now be %{_emacs_version} etc 3/ No need to buildrequire emacs-el 4/ Comments need adding to the spec file about the patches - have these been sent upstream? If so, supply a date, an email archive url or a bugzilla url. 5/ BuildRoot is no longer needed - remove. 6/ In install, remove the rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT 7/ Fix up the changelog entry to properly comply with the guidelines Once these are done I'll finish the review.
Can this just be closed out now? It's been 26 months with no response.
Stalled Review. Closing per #15, #16 and: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews If you ever want to continue with this review, please reopen or submit new review.