Spec URL: Attached to bug SRPM URL: Attached to bug Description: A file-sharing client for the Direct Connect network LinuxDC++ is a Direct Connect client based on DC++. Utilizing the latest DC++ core, LinuxDC++ offers similar functionality to the Windows client like segmented downloading, TTH based file integrity, etc. with a GTK+ user interface. LinuxDC++ is free and open source software licensed under the GPL. Direct Connect (DC) is a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing protocol. Clients connect to a central hub where they can chat or share files with one another. Users can view other users' list of shared files or search the hub for files.
Created attachment 552287 [details] linuxdcpp.spec
Created attachment 552288 [details] linuxdcpp-1.1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm
linuxdcpp was previously in Fedora but was obsoleted due to not being maintained. The previous package review was in bug #234331, but that bug did not allow me to set fedora-cvs flag to ? as mentioned in: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests#Package_Change_Requests_for_existing_packages Since it was not recommended to reopen that bug, I am opening this new bug and attaching the updated spec and SRPM files (I don't have a public URL to upload them to). These changes upgrade the linuxdcpp package to 1.1.0 and drop a patch that has been merged into upstream. A couple of patches were added to stop rpmlint from complaining about some issues that did not keep the package from building and running. Since I am a developer of linuxdcpp as well I will make sure these get merged into upstream before the next release.
If I'm not mistaken, you would need a sponsor? Blocks field updated. Quick informal check of the packaging: [valtri@forkys results]$ rpmlint *.rpm linuxdcpp.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/linuxdcpp 0775L 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. 1. MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. The problem is probably the write access for the group. 2. MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage 3. These items are not needed for Fedora or EPEL >= 6. You can consider removing them, but it is not a blocker: 'Group:' tag 'BuildRoot:' tag '%defattr' tag '%clean' section rm -rf %{buildroot} (from beginning of '%install' section)
* Please don't attach packages inside bugzilla. Instead, follow the following process and notice the steps where you can request fedorapeople.org storage as a last resort: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers * Also run rpmlint (or "rpmlint -i" for more helpful messages) on all packages, i.e. the src.rpm and the built rpms. * About Patch1, please notice: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#incorrect-fsf-address * The %install section is not for compiling files, so you don't need CXXFLAGS in there, and %_smp_mflags typically are not used there either. * Files below %_mandir are automatically marked %doc.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 813832 ***
Removing FE-NEEDSPONSOR from the closed review tickets.