http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085.spec: Release 2 spec file http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085-1.3.5-2.fc10.src.rpm: Release 2 SRPM Description: This is a graphical simulator for intel 8085 assembly language programs and has some nice features. This is my first package and I am looking for a sponsor.
*** Bug 503800 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
can you please follow new package submission process given at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Contributor
I did follow the guidelines given in the wiki page and closed the previous request and added a new one with FE-NEEDSPONSOR in the "blocks"and "first package" in the description field.
For record only, Discussions around this package review was started on https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-electronic-lab/ticket/22. Now it will be carried out here. FYI, there is somewhat equivalent simulator for 8085 maintained by Fabian Affolter. http://gsim85.sourceforge.net/ I'll do the review and eventually sponsor you.
#1: can you give me your FAS username please ? and apply for the packager status at https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/group/view/packager #2 add %{?_smp_mflags} to your make in the %build section #3: wrong URL Correct the URL to: http://gnusim8085.sourceforge.net/ #4: Preserve timestamps make INSTALL="install -p" DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install #5: docs %doc %{_datadir}/doc/gnusim8085/ should rather be : %doc ABOUT-NLS AUTHORS ChangeLog COPYING NEWS README TODO %doc doc/examples/ doc/asm-guide.txt Add the following line at the end of the %install rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_docdir} #6: Summary should be clear: "A 8085 Simulator" #7: %description missing fullstop. #8: License is GPL version 2 only : GPLv2
#9: file doc/gnusim8085.1 should be copied to mandir at the end of the %install section cp -p doc/gnusim8085.1 %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1
(In reply to comment #5) > #1: can you give me your FAS username please ? FAS username is sherry151 > and apply for the packager status at > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/group/view/packager done > Add the following line at the end of the %install > rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_docdir} Can I not put this in the %clean section? I made the suggested changes to the spec file and also some other changes necessary. #1 mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1 was necessary for building successfully #2 %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz for packaging the man file http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085.spec: Release 3 spec file http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085-1.3.5-3.fc10.src.rpm: Release 3 SRPM
#1: some typos in the description : stac and microproessor I think the description should be: GNUSim8085 is a graphical simulator for Intel 8085 microprocessor assembly language. It has many features including a keypad which can be used to write assembly language programs. It also has stack, memory and port viewers which can be used for debugging the programs. #2: directory ownership in %files %{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnusim8085/gnusim8085_icon.png the directory %{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnusim8085/ should be owned by the package. Hence %{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnusim8085/gnusim8085_icon.png should be %{_datadir}/pixmaps/gnusim8085/ #3: The package is ready. I have sponsored you. Update the spec file and SRPM. I'll complete the review.
Updated the spec file and srpm. Following are the urls: http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085.spec: Release 4 spec file http://sherry151.fedorapeople.org/gnusim8085-1.3.5-4.fc10.src.rpm: Release 4 SRPM I will be waiting for review completion. Thanks Rangeen Basu
- MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name} - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package is licensed (GPL) with an open-source compatible license and meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. - MUST: the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. - MUST: The spec file for the package is be legible. - MUST: The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least i386. - MUST: All build dependencies is listed in BuildRequires. - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly. - MUST: If the package does not contain shared library files located in the dynamic linker's default paths - MUST: the package is not designed to be relocatable - MUST: the package owns all directories that it creates. - MUST: the package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: There are no Large documentation files - MUST: %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. - MUST: There are no Header files or static libraries - MUST: The package does not contain library files with a suffix - MUST: Package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives - MUST: Package containing GUI applications includes a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. - MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. SHOULD Items: - SHOULD: The source package does include license text(s) as COPYING - SHOULD: mock builds succcessfully in i386. - SHOULD: The reviewer tested that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. - SHOULD: No scriptlets were used, those scriptlets must be sane. - SHOULD: No subpackages present. APPROVED
Read how to request CVS access https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-electronic-lab/ticket/19#comment:8 Also apply for the EL-5 branch and add me into the owners :)
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: gnusim8085 Short Description: A graphical simulator for Intel 8085 microprocessor Owners: sherry151 chitlesh Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-5
CVS done.
FYI - the recent build uses completely wrong version-release info - gnusim8085-svn.141-5.fc13