Spec URL: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping.spec SRPM URL: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping-0.1-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: This library is a fork of George Notaras' python-ping library, which is an implementation of the standard ICMP ping in pure Python. As it uses raw ICMP sockets, you need to be root to use the functions exported by the ping module. This fork by Pierre Bourdon adds a setup.py file in order to permit an easier distribution of the package. The license of the library remains unchanged (GPLv2), see COPYING. This is my first first package and I will be needing a sponsor.
rpmlint shows the following: $ rpmlint python-ping-0.1-1.fc13.src.rpm python-ping.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US python-ping.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot C An implementation of the standard ICMP ping in pure Python. python-ping.src: E: no-changelogname-tag python-ping.src:3: W: macro-in-comment %global python-ping.src:3: W: macro-in-comment %{__python} python-ping.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %{python_sitearch} 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. $ rpmlint python-ping-0.1-1.fc13.src.rpm python-ping.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US python-ping.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot C An implementation of the standard ICMP ping in pure Python. python-ping.src: E: no-changelogname-tag python-ping.src:3: W: macro-in-comment %global python-ping.src:3: W: macro-in-comment %{__python} python-ping.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %{python_sitearch} 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. Proposed fixes: [-] Try to cleanup all comments containing macros. [-] Remove dot in Summary. [-] Add the first Changelogs entry line, some thing like: - Initial package
Sorry I forgot: $ rpmlint python-ping-0.1-1.fc13.i686.rpm python-ping.i686: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US python-ping.i686: W: summary-ended-with-dot C An implementation of the standard ICMP ping in pure Python. python-ping.i686: E: no-changelogname-tag python-ping.i686: E: no-binary python-ping.i686: W: no-documentation python-ping.i686: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ping.py 0644L /usr/bin/env 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 2 warnings.
if this is pure python it should be platform/hardware independent ie: BuildArch: noarch
[makerpm@andrew SRPMS]$ rpmlint python-ping-0.1-1.fc13.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Made changes heres the new output. Sorry I'm a new noob forgot to run rpmlint. Re-uploaded the packages to the URL above. They are the same files.
rpmlint on SPEC and SRPM is OK. but $ rpmlint python-ping-0.1-1.fc13.noarch.rpm python-ping.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US python-ping.noarch: W: no-documentation python-ping.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ping.py 0644L /usr/bin/env 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. You should either remove shebang or make executable: ping.py Tip to remove shebang: %{__sed} -i '1d' ping.py
i have looked at the source of ping.py it seems to be a pure module so removing shebang is more appropriate. [...SNIP...] if __name__ == '__main__': verbose_ping("heise.de") verbose_ping("google.com") verbose_ping("a-test-url-taht-is-not-available.com") verbose_ping("192.168.1.1")
you should add the following files to the %doc section: AUTHORS COPYING README
Ok added %{__sed} -i '1d' ping.py and the stuff in %doc. Only warning I'm getting is invalid URL on the source location but it was working a minute ago must be down right now. Uploaded updated files.
never mind URL is working now
rpmlint is OK now. $ rpmlint python-ping-0.1-1.fc13.noarch.rpm python-ping.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint python-ping.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint python-ping-0.1-1.fc13.src.rpm python-ping.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. PS. Other fedora contributor should review this package, I'm a new package reviewer.
Alright thank you. Do I just need to wait until someone else looks at it then?
Just some more comment: - The license is GPLv2+, see 'version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.' - This is a 'noarch' package the CFLAGS are not needed. Everytime you make changes to your spec file, you must bump the release.
Thank you for the comments I made the changes you recommended and uploaded the files: SPEC: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping.spec SRPM: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping-0.1-4.fc13.src.rpm I bumped the release to 4 as this is the 4th time I've made changes to the spec file and built the package now. Let me know if anything else needs to be done.
There are still some issues: - The %{python_sitelib} macros should be defined as mentioned in the guidelines https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros - The license is still wrong - Every release bump must have a corresponding changelog entry. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Changelogs - Isn't the build command missing?
Ok I change the %{python_sitelib} macro definition to have the if statement for Fedora 12 or bellow and RHEL 5 or bellow. I assume thats what you were refering to since I had already defined %{python_sitelib}. I added GPLv2+ to the liscense. Added changes to change log I thought when you said CFLAGS wasn't needed to remove the line. The build command is back now. Here are the new files. SPEC: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping.spec SRPM: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping-0.1-6.fc13.src.rpm
AFAIK you should keep history of changes in changelog section, since this is -6 they should be 6 entries, correct me if I'm wrong.
So I should be keeping all previous changes in the log for 1, 2, 3, etc...?
Anyway I assume thats the case and have made the change there as well here are the updated for files. Sorry for all of the changes guys this stuff is probably pretty trivial. Just trying to get the hang of things. SPEC: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping.spec SRPM: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping-0.1-7.fc13.src.rpm
Looks like the links above were down today, but they should be working again now.
Does the package look like its good to go? or does it still need work? Also not positive of the procedure for getting a sponsor since it my first time, but http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join doesn't really give specifics. I have a Fedora account already.
Never mind found http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group
Hi, For starter, I'm the current python-ping upstream maintainer. I would like to point that Fabian is not exactly right about the license : while setup.py is GPLv2+, ping.py is GPLv2 only, so this package should be advertised as using a GPLv2 license instead of GPLv2+. When I'll release 0.2 (probably not soon as the code is quite mature and is around since 1997), I'll probably change the license of setup.py from v2+ to v2 to avoid any confusion like this. Anyway, thanks for considering python-ping for inclusion in Fedora :) . Regards, Pierre.
Sorry about the licensing mix up. I'll get the spec changed back to GPLv2.
Updated spec and srpm: SPEC: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping.spec SRPM: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping-0.1-8.fc13.src.rpm
The URLs for the spec file and the Source RPM are not right or the files are gone.
The server was moved I'm uploading the files now. Links will be up soon.
spec and srpm from 2010-07-16 back up. SPEC: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping.spec SRPM: http://www.schomin.com/fedora/python-ping-0.1-8.fc13.src.rpm
Thanks for the links. I can do an informal review but according to the guidelines a sponsor has to do the official review.
python-ping 0.2 was released in the meantime.
Can you please update your package?
I've been kind of busy lately. Give me a day and I'll get the package updated.
Thanks
Not sure why this was returned to the review queue instead of just being closed, but I've marked it stalled.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 13 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 13. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '13'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 13's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 13 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Fedora 13 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2011-06-25. Fedora 13 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.