Spec URL: http://cicku.me/lnav.spec SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/lnav-0.5.0-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: The log file navigator, lnav, is an enhanced log file viewer that takes advantage of any semantic information that can be gleaned from the files being viewed, such as timestamps and log levels. Using this extra semantic information, lnav can do things like interleaving messages from different files, generate histograms of messages over time, and providing hotkeys for navigating through the file. It is hoped that these features will allow the user to quickly and efficiently zero in on problems. Fedora Account System Username: cicku
Koji success: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5316646
0. The SRPM used in koji build referenced in Comment #1 differs from the one submitted for review. The one submitted here doesn't build. 1. Similarly to 'lookat', you'll need to regenerate upstream build files to support aarch64. However, calling autoreconf here fails on automake because some of the standard distribution files, namely AUTHORS and ChangeLog, are missing. Option #1: Ask upstream to include those files. Option #2: Force automake to use different strictness level, e.g. "foreign". See automake info page for details on this. 2. None of the source files mentions their license, neither do the README files. Both standard BSD 2-clause (./LICENSE) license and GPLv3 (./COPYING) are included. It's possible the project uses them both but please ask upstream for clarification. If both are really used, the correct License tag will be "BSD and GPLv3+". See the Licensing Guidelines for valid short names: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses 3. Build-time dependencies are incorrect. You can safely drop those: - glibc-devel - libstdc++-devel - libtool However, the following is necessary for the package to build: - openssl-devel 4. There's a test suite. Use it. (i.e., make a %check section which runs "make check") 5. Package COPYING in %doc as well, if relevant (after your resolve issue #2). 6. Summary -- Add "The". 7. %description -- Replace both "lnav" occurences with %{name}.
(In reply to comment #2) > 0. The SRPM used in koji build referenced in Comment #1 differs from the one > submitted for review. The one submitted here doesn't build. Oh..Maybe I submitted the wrong revision...Fixed. > > 1. Similarly to 'lookat', you'll need to regenerate upstream build files to > support aarch64. However, calling autoreconf here fails on automake because > some of the standard distribution files, namely AUTHORS and ChangeLog, are > missing. > > Option #1: Ask upstream to include those files. > > Option #2: Force automake to use different strictness level, e.g. "foreign". > See automake info page for details on this. I've sent a mail to upstream and I'm just waiting for the answer. > 2. None of the source files mentions their license, neither do the README > files. Both standard BSD 2-clause (./LICENSE) license and GPLv3 (./COPYING) > are included. It's possible the project uses them both but please ask > upstream for clarification. If both are really used, the correct License > tag will be "BSD and GPLv3+". See the Licensing Guidelines for valid short > names: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#SoftwareLicenses Sent. > 3. Build-time dependencies are incorrect. > You can safely drop those: > - glibc-devel > - libstdc++-devel > - libtool > However, the following is necessary for the package to build: > - openssl-devel Yeah I know the openssl.a and that's why you failed... This is listed in my koji build, please abandon comment 1~ > 4. There's a test suite. Use it. (i.e., make a %check section which runs > "make check") Fixed. > 5. Package COPYING in %doc as well, if relevant (after your resolve issue > #2). Okay. > 6. Summary -- Add "The". Replaced with : A curses-based tool for viewing and analyzing log files > 7. %description -- Replace both "lnav" occurences with %{name}. Oh... MUST/SHOULD? BTW I'll realease next version when everything looks fine.
I think you forgot to upload the updated version.
(In reply to comment #4) > I think you forgot to upload the updated version. No I have to wait for upstream's licensing answer.
Alright.
(In reply to comment #6) > Alright. Upstream said that the GPL you saw is the comments generated by autotools. License is BSD with no doubt. I've patched the configure.ac but I don't know if it's correct. New SPEC: http://cicku.me/lnav.spec New SRPM: http://cicku.me/lnav-0.5.0-2.fc20.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #6) > Alright. Upstream just release 0.5.1 with everything fixed. New SPEC: http://cicku.me/lnav.spec New SRPM: http://cicku.me/lnav-0.5.1-1.fc20.src.rpm
Ok, looks almost perfect now :) Patching is no longer necessary, you can drop those lines. And change 'make test' to 'make check'.
(In reply to comment #9) Fixed. New SPEC: http://cicku.me/lnav.spec New SRPM: http://cicku.me/lnav-0.5.1-2.fc20.src.rpm
Awesome, approving.
(In reply to comment #11) > Awesome, approving. Thanks! If you have time please help review some other packages like nsnake (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=955913) ,it's really simple with less than 40 lines spec...and monitorix (written in perl)
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: lnav Short Description: A curses-based tool for viewing and analyzing log files Owners: cicku Branches: f18 f19 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
lnav-0.5.1-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lnav-0.5.1-2.fc19
lnav-0.5.1-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lnav-0.5.1-2.fc18
lnav-0.5.1-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository.
lnav-0.5.1-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.
lnav-0.5.1-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: lnav New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: cicku