Spec URL: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/packages/SPECS/gpick.spec SRPM URL: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/gpick-0.2.3-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: gpick is an advanced color picker written in C++ using the GTK+ toolkit. It has an array of advanced features such as creating palettes from images, color scheme creation, magnification, import/export in multiple formats, and more.
I will review it.
Whoops, there are a bunch of bundled things I missed in the source. I'm working on this, will update bug when I fix them. Please wait on your review until then, and thank you for your quick response!
Just some comments (MUSTFIXES): # rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/*rpm gpick.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://gpick.googlecode.com/files/gpick_0.2.3.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found gpick-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. => broken debuginfos Likely your package doesn't honor RPM_OPT_FLAGS. Unfortunately it's impossible to tell because the logs being produced don't provide sufficient information: ... Compiling ==> build/source/gtk/Swatch.o Compiling ==> build/source/gtk/Zoomed.o Compiling ==> build/source/layout/Box.o Compiling ==> build/source/layout/Layout.o Compiling ==> build/source/layout/LuaBindings.o Compiling ==> build/source/layout/ReferenceCounter.o Compiling ==> build/source/layout/Style.o Compiling ==> build/source/layout/System.o ... => make the build process verbose.
> Unfortunately it's impossible to tell because the logs being produced don't > provide sufficient information: In the meantime, to enable compilation logs, all the XXXCOMSTR should be unset in SConscript. The attached patch removes all definitions of these variables.
Created attachment 482728 [details] Patch to enable compilation/linking logs
Are you still OK with this package? Do you need any kind of help?
I've had very little time to work on this since my last email. There are a number of bundled libraries that will need to be untangled and worked through before this is close to packaging. I probably need to withdraw this review request until I get more time to fix those problems. There's no good CLOSED reason other than INSUFFICIENT_DATA for this -- packaging is not really ready for review yet.