Spec URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SPECS/xgridloc.spec SRPM URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SRPMS/xgridloc-0.9-4.fc10.src.rpm Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1065372 Description: xgridloc is a GTK+ graphical version of gridloc and performs the same basic functions for ham radio operators, but additionally it can use xplanet to display the home and DX locations and the great circle path between them. * Sun Jan 18 2009 Randall J. Berry 'Dp67' <dp67> - 0.9-4 - Check rpmlint fix lint errors - 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. - Submit for review - Mock build f9/10/devel i386 - Test build on Koji all arches
bump src to F11 Spec URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SPECS/xgridloc.spec SRPM URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SRPMS/xgridloc-0.9-5.fc11.src.rpm * Fri Feb 6 2009 Randall J. Berry 'Dp67' <dp67> - 0.9-5 - bump src to f11 - minor spec edits
I'm sorry that nobody has looked at this yet. It builds cleanly on rawhide and seems to install and run fine (although I have no idea at all what data I'm supposed to provide). The tarball in the src.rpm does not match the tarball I downloaded from the Source0: URL. Do you know why this might be the case? It looks like the upstream source differs in that it includes a COPYING file, although it's v3 of the copying file while the source still seems to be GPLv2+ (which is OK; the version of the copying file has no bearing on the version of the GPL the software is under). The debuginfo package has the C source files but no header files. I don't know what might cause that; I don't see anything in the build process that would indicate anything out of the ordinary. I'll ask around. Please note the following output from desktop-file-install: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/xgridloc-0.9-5.fc12.x86_64/usr/share/applications/xgridloc.desktop: warning: value "xgridloc.png" for key "Icon" in group "Desktop Entry" is an icon name with an extension, but there should be no extension as described in the Icon Theme Specification if the value is not an absolute path Any reason not to fix that up? X source files match upstream. * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. ? debuginfo package is missing some files; not sure why. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: xgridloc = 0.9-5.fc12 xgridloc(x86-64) = 0.9-5.fc12 = /bin/sh libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit) * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. X desktop file could use a tweaak. The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package reviews recently, please consider doing one.
(In reply to comment #2) > The tarball in the src.rpm does not match the tarball I downloaded from the > Source0: URL. Do you know why this might be the case? It looks like the > upstream source differs in that it includes a COPYING file, although it's v3 of > the copying file while the source still seems to be GPLv2+ (which is OK; the > version of the copying file has no bearing on the version of the GPL the > software is under). I wrote to the author earlier and asked if he could include a GPL license looks like he added it. I'll use the newer tarball and rebuild the src rpm. > Please note the following output from desktop-file-install: > > /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/xgridloc-0.9-5.fc12.x86_64/usr/share/applications/xgridloc.desktop: > warning: value "xgridloc.png" for key "Icon" in group "Desktop Entry" is an > icon name with an extension, but there should be no extension as described in > the Icon Theme Specification if the value is not an absolute path Fixed: removed the extension from the icon in .desktop file. Spec URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SPECS/xgridloc.spec SRPM URL: http://dp67.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/SRPMS/xgridloc-0.9-6.fc11.src.rpm Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1464685 * Thu Jul 9 2009 Randall J. Berry 'Dp67' <dp67(at)fedoraproject.org> - 0.9-6 - Upstream source added COPYING file - Fix .desktop file removed ext from icon - Mock build f11/devel i386 - Test build on Koji all arches
Looks good; thanks. APPROVED
Thanks Tibbs New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: xgridloc Short Description: An application for the calculation of Maidenhead QRA Locators Owners: dp67 Branches: F-10, F-11, devel
CVS done.
Any reason this ticket is still open?
closing open ticket