Bug 524190 - Review Request: flowcanvas - an interactive Gtkmm/Gnomecanvasmm widget for “boxes and lines” environments
Review Request: flowcanvas - an interactive Gtkmm/Gnomecanvasmm widget for “b...
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 567027
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
low Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2009-09-18 06:13 EDT by Alexander
Modified: 2010-02-21 01:54 EST (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-01-16 09:53:11 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Alexander 2009-09-18 06:13:17 EDT
Spec URL: http://dreamer.fedorapeople.org/drobilla/flowcanvas/flowcanvas.spec
SRPM URL: http://dreamer.fedorapeople.org/drobilla/flowcanvas/flowcanvas-0.5.1-1.fc11.src.rpm
Description: FlowCanvas is an interactive Gtkmm/Gnomecanvasmm widget for “boxes and lines”
environments (ie modular synths or interactive finite state automata diagrams).

This is my first package ever and I still need a sponsor.
I decided to package this software because I wanted to include Patchage in yum and this is one of its dependencies. Other packages I will make after this will be Patchage itself and it's other dependency: Raul.
Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2009-09-18 13:57:15 EDT
This fails to build for me; the patch doesn't apply:

Patch #0 (flowcanvas-0.5.1.include-stdint.patch):
+ /bin/cat /builddir/build/SOURCES/flowcanvas-0.5.1.include-stdint.patch
+ /usr/bin/patch -s -p0 -b --suffix .include-stdint --fuzz=0
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|--- /home/dreamer/rpmbuild/BUILD/flowcanvas-0.5.1/flowcanvas/Connection.hpp.orig       2009-09-12 14:18:52.000000000 +0200
|+++ /home/dreamer/rpmbuild/BUILD/flowcanvas-0.5.1/flowcanvas/Connection.hpp    2009-09-12 14:19:20.000000000 +0200
--------------------------
File to patch:
Skip this patch? [y]
1 out of 1 hunk ignored
RPM build errors:

Please try to ensure that your packages build properly before submitting them for review.  If you read through http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers you can find instructions on using our build system to do scratch builds.

Please clear the Whiteboard when this package is ready to be reviewed.
Comment 2 Alexander 2009-10-01 02:27:00 EDT
Thank you for helping Jason.

I have now learned how to use mock to do a clean build and using it I've found the problem with the patch and another dependency I overlooked.

It should build properly now.
Comment 3 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-10-10 14:49:15 EDT
Well, first of all some general packaging guidelines:

* From the next time please change the release number of your spec
  file every time you modify it to avoid confusion.
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/FrequentlyMadeMistakes

* If the software installs both system-wide libraries and some
  header files,
  - Then those files for development should be packaged into the
    seperate subpackage (usually named as "-devel" package)
    and should not be included in the main package.
    Please refer to:
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Devel_Packages

    You can base your spec file on a skeleton file provided
    by rpmdevtools rpm. After installing rpmdevtools, you can
    try
    $ rpmdev-newspec -t lib flowcanvas
    ( see $ rpmdev-newspec --help )

  - And Fedora already has many srpms of this type, for example:
    http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/oniguruma/devel/oniguruma.spec?view=co

* Please don't use _unpackaged_files_terminate_build and correct
  %files entry (if there are some mistakes)

* You can use "rpmlint" command (in rpmlint rpm) to detect some
  generic packaging mistakes. Please check your srpm / rebuilt
  binary rpm / installed rpm with rpmlint.

* Please use "%{name}.spec" for the name of the spec file.

Then some notes:
* Summary should begin with capital letter

* "GPL" is not a valid license tag for Fedora:
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#.22or_later_version.22_licenses
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#GPL_and_LGPL

* Please use macros correctly.
  ! Note that your srpm still does not build on 64 bits architecture.
    On 64 bits architecture libraries are to be installed under /usr/lib64,
    not /usr/lib. Anyway using %{_libdir} macro will fix this problem, see:
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros

* Using %{version} macro is preferred because with it you probably
  won't have to change the SourceURL when version is upgraded:
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_.25.7Bversion.7D

- Consider to use
--------------------------------------------------------------
make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p"
--------------------------------------------------------------
  to keep timestamps on installed files as much as possible.
  This method usually works for Makefiles generated by recent autotools.

* For rpms installing system-wide libraries, please check:
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Shared_Libraries

* For %files:
  - Please create -devel subpackages and move developement related files
    into it.
    ! And note that every package containing pkgconfig .pc file
      should have "Requires: pkgconfig":
      https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Pkgconfig_Files

    ! Also see:
      https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package

  - libtool .la files should be removed:
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries

  - Please take care of directory ownership issue.
    The directory %{_includedir}/flowcanvas/ itself is not owned by any
    packages:
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories#Common_Mistakes
Comment 4 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-10-23 10:18:26 EDT
ping?
Comment 5 Alexander 2009-10-23 10:31:56 EDT
I'm sorry, this is a lot of stuff for which I don't know where to start really and atm I'm trying to finish my bachelors which of course has priority.

Maybe I'll look into this somewhere next month when I have time to really sit down for it.

Thank you for pointing these things out though. It is quite difficult to get into this whole packaging business.
Comment 6 Orcan Ogetbil 2009-11-26 04:09:43 EST
I believe that the OP wanted to have patchage [1] in Fedora. This is one of the dependencies. Another dependency is raul which I just submitted to review here:
bug 541535

[1] http://drobilla.net/software/patchage/
Comment 7 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-11-26 07:51:37 EST
Setting needinfo.
Comment 8 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-12-07 09:46:03 EST
ping again?
Comment 9 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-12-23 09:33:37 EST
Again ping?
Comment 10 Mamoru TASAKA 2010-01-07 13:47:01 EST
I will close this bug if no response is received from the reporter
within ONE WEEK.
Comment 11 Mamoru TASAKA 2010-01-16 09:53:11 EST
Once closing.

If someone wants to import this package into Fedora, please file
a new review request and mark this bug as a duplicate of the new
one.

Thank you!
Comment 12 Orcan Ogetbil 2010-02-21 01:54:13 EST

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 567027 ***

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.