Spec URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync-0.44.0-1.src.rpm Description: csync is an implementation of a file synchronizer which provides the feature of roaming home directories for Linux clients. csync makes use of libsmbclient in Samba/Windows environments. This is my first package and I'm looking for a sponsor. I'm the developer of csync.
a couple of remarks (I'm not a sponsor, so I cannot sponsor you) * please run rpmlint against the spec-file and the resulting rpms/srpms (license needs to be GPLv2+, changelog wrong, groups non-standard) * License should be GPLv2+ * The specfile has tar.bz2 as source name - but the website only offers a tar.gz * Please get rid of the author-name in all descriptions
Thanks, for the comments. I've updated the spec files and fixed the bugs. I'm still looking for something like: build <dist> <arch> <specfile> which sets up a chroot with all needed bulid requirements, builds the package and runs rpmlint for me. Spec URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync-0.44.0-1.fc12.src.rpm
There are still a few suseisms there. ;-) * "# norootforbuild" is redundant and not used by anything around here, our build system (Koji) never builds as root. I'd suggest removing that magic comment (though it is not required as we don't have guidelines for comments ;-) ). * While you fixed the main package's License tag, the License tags for the subpackages are still bad (not compliant to Fedora guidelines). This is a MUST fix. * The cmake invocation should use the %cmake macro. This one also definitely needs to be fixed. * While %__make, %__rm, %{__mkdir} and the like are acceptable, we generally just write make, rm, mkdir etc., those macros which expand to full paths are not really necessary. (But this is not a must.) * We don't systematically split out lib* subpackages, but in this case I guess it makes sense. The most common naming convention for those subpackages in Fedora is of the csync-libs form, but libcsync is OK as a name in this case. (So IMHO that item is fine here, this was just informative.) (Note: this is not a full review, just the stuff I noticed at first glance.)
PS: using our macros like %cmake is a SHOULD item in the guidelines, but you need to have a good reason not to use them if you don't, so in the absence of such a reason, please use the macro. :-) (And yes, this and the (usual) non-use of the %__ type macros is what I meant with differences in macro usage on IRC.) As for your question: rpmbuild -bs --nodeps <specfile> mock -r <dist>-<arch> <SRPM> where <dist> is e.g. fedora-13, <arch> is the basearch (i386, x86_64) and <SRPM> is what rpmbuild just produced.
Thanks for the comments, fixed and uploaded.
Links to updated spec and srpm, please. koji scratch build would be nice too: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/UsingKoji#Scratch_builds_2 Some comments - the empty # lines looks strange - you don't need to repeat License: tag in subpackage if everything is under identical license - you might want to change Requires: libcsync = %{version} Requires: libcsync = %{version}-%{release} - I believe defattr should changed %defattr(-,root,root) -> %defattr(-,root,root,-) - change all %__foo macros to %{__foo} - remove gcc-c++ from buildreq - tags are in strange order - is source1 of any use? - bump release and add changelog when doing changes
(In reply to comment #6) > Links to updated spec and srpm, please. koji scratch build would be nice too: Spec URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync-0.44.0-2.fc12.src.rpm Koji URL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1993331 > Some comments > > - the empty # lines looks strange I've removed them. > - you don't need to repeat License: tag in subpackage if everything is > under identical license I've removed them too. > - you might want to change > Requires: libcsync = %{version} > Requires: libcsync = %{version}-%{release} Done. > - I believe defattr should changed > %defattr(-,root,root) -> %defattr(-,root,root,-) Done. > - change all %__foo macros to %{__foo} I don't see a reason for this, only if the macro would support options. > - remove gcc-c++ from buildreq Done. > - tags are in strange order Is there a rule for the order? > - is source1 of any use? Sure, you can verify that the source archive hasn't been modified. gpg --verify csync-0.44.0.tar.gz.asc It is like a md5sum but cryptographic secured. They are included in other SRPMS of Fedora too. See libssh for example. > - bump release and add changelog when doing changes Done.
There was already a review request (bug #503136) open on this one, which was almost completed. If the submitter does not reply to the ping within a week or so, this review bug can go on. Otherwise this bug should be closed as duplicate.
>> - change all %__foo macros to %{__foo} >I don't see a reason for this, only if the macro would support options. Never seen %__foo style used before, that's all. >> - tags are in strange order >Is there a rule for the order? Just the "most important stuff first" rule I would say. >> - is source1 of any use? >Sure, you can verify that the source archive hasn't been modified. >gpg --verify csync-0.44.0.tar.gz.asc >It is like a md5sum but cryptographic secured. >They are included in other SRPMS of Fedora too. See libssh for example. Ok, .asc is not large anyway. Package is in pretty good shape now, thanks so far Andreas.
ping
*** Bug 503136 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I'll take this, as a sponsor is needed and none of the previous commenters (other than myself) are sponsors.
Ok, thanks Kevin.
* Mon Mar 08 2010 - Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.44.0-3 - Fixed pedantic format request (ordering of tags, macros). Spec URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync-0.44.0-3.fc12.src.rpm
setting fedora-review flag
What does that mean?
The fedora-review flag is supposed to get set when a package is currently under review (but it was missed here initially).
Any idea what happened to the review of this package. I was looking forward to this package making it into Fedora repos.
What happened is that I completely forgot about this and the submitter didn't notice either, or didn't dare complaining… I'm going to clear the review flag, since I haven't really started and I guess it would be better if some other sponsor would take it. I clearly dropped the ball here, sorry for that. :-( Andreas, are you still here?
I'm still here. As nobody cared I lost the interest...
(In reply to comment #14) > Spec URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync.spec > SRPM URL: http://www.cynapses.org/tmp/rpm/csync-0.44.0-3.fc12.src.rpm URLs appear to be dead.
That's because the submitter lost interest after I dropped the ball. :-( (It'd have been nice if somebody, probably the submitter himself, would have pinged me. I get tons of bugmails, so I do forget things sometimes.)
Andreas, if you do want to continue the review, please post working spec and SRPM links and reopen the bug. If anyone else wants to get csync into Fedora, please submit a new review request.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 848208 ***