I took over tuxpaint when Panu needed to dump a bunch of packages a while back because my daughter *loves* it, and I thought I'd be able to spend some time working on it (packaging the stamps, for example), but that hasn't actually happened.
Anyway, I'd appreciate some help, either a one-time thing to get the stamps packaged or a co-maintainer.
Steve
Oh, and I just noticed that tuxpaint has a bunch of rpmlint warnings right now. They look easy enough to fix, but I probably won't get to it until after the Great Rebuild.
Again, help would be greatly appreciated.
Steve
Steven Pritchard wrote:
I took over tuxpaint when Panu needed to dump a bunch of packages a while back because my daughter *loves* it, and I thought I'd be able to spend some time working on it (packaging the stamps, for example), but that hasn't actually happened.
Anyway, I'd appreciate some help, either a one-time thing to get the stamps packaged or a co-maintainer.
What is missing with the stamp packaging? I just built this for FC6 and got a bunch of files put into /usr/share/tuxpaint/stamps/cartoon/tux/* It looks like 'make install', as called from %install, already installs the stamp files.
--Wart
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 01:26:38PM -0700, Wart wrote:
What is missing with the stamp packaging? I just built this for FC6 and got a bunch of files put into /usr/share/tuxpaint/stamps/cartoon/tux/* It looks like 'make install', as called from %install, already installs the stamp files.
But there are more stamps available in the tuxpaint-stamps archive:
http://dl.sourceforge.net/tuxpaint/tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25.tar.gz
Steve
Steven Pritchard wrote:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 01:26:38PM -0700, Wart wrote:
What is missing with the stamp packaging? I just built this for FC6 and got a bunch of files put into /usr/share/tuxpaint/stamps/cartoon/tux/* It looks like 'make install', as called from %install, already installs the stamp files.
But there are more stamps available in the tuxpaint-stamps archive:
http://dl.sourceforge.net/tuxpaint/tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25.tar.gz
Here is a first pass at a package. Feel free to take it over and submit it for review:
http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/queue/tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25-1.src.rp... http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/queue/tuxpaint-stamps.spec
I wasn't able to test the language translations in the package, as I didn't see anywhere in the UI where the stamp messages appear.
rpmlint complains about the 'sv' language code being invalid, but I'm not sure what should be used in its place. To further confuse matters, it complains about this on a 'sw' (swahili) file:
E: tuxpaint-stamps incorrect-locale-sv /usr/share/locale/sw/LC_MESSAGES/tuxpaint-stamps.mo
--Mike
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:44:27PM -0700, Wart wrote:
Here is a first pass at a package. Feel free to take it over and submit it for review:
http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/queue/tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25-1.src.rp... http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/queue/tuxpaint-stamps.spec
Very nice. Thanks.
Stupid question, but did you check to see if they actually show up in tuxpaint as additional stamps?
And now an opinion question... If we get this in, would it make sense to have tuxpaint Require it, or should it remain optional?
Steve
Steven Pritchard wrote:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:44:27PM -0700, Wart wrote:
Here is a first pass at a package. Feel free to take it over and submit it for review:
http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/queue/tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25-1.src.rp... http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/queue/tuxpaint-stamps.spec
Very nice. Thanks.
Stupid question, but did you check to see if they actually show up in tuxpaint as additional stamps?
Yes, I did. :)
And now an opinion question... If we get this in, would it make sense to have tuxpaint Require it, or should it remain optional?
Due to the size of the stamp package, I would rather it be optional and not required.
--Wart
Wart wrote:
Steven Pritchard wrote:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:44:27PM -0700, Wart wrote:
Here is a first pass at a package. Feel free to take it over and submit it for review:
http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/queue/tuxpaint-stamps-2005.11.25-1.src.rp...
http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/queue/tuxpaint-stamps.spec
Very nice. Thanks.
Stupid question, but did you check to see if they actually show up in tuxpaint as additional stamps?
Yes, I did. :)
And now an opinion question... If we get this in, would it make sense to have tuxpaint Require it, or should it remain optional?
Due to the size of the stamp package, I would rather it be optional and not required.
+1,
Regards,
Hans
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 04:44:27PM -0700, Wart wrote:
rpmlint complains about the 'sv' language code being invalid, but I'm not sure what should be used in its place. To further confuse matters, it complains about this on a 'sw' (swahili) file:
E: tuxpaint-stamps incorrect-locale-sv /usr/share/locale/sw/LC_MESSAGES/tuxpaint-stamps.mo
Something is broken here, but I don't think it is tuxpaint-stamps.
$ rpm -qf /usr/share/locale/sv glibc-common-2.4-8 $ rpm -qf /usr/share/locale/sw file /usr/share/locale/sw is not owned by any package $ rpm -qf /usr/share/locale/sw/LC_MESSAGES/* iso-codes-0.49-1 iso-codes-0.49-1 tuxpaint-0.9.15b-1.fc5
And iso-codes is a core package. (One I've never noticed before...)
I'm guessing glibc-common *should* own /usr/share/locale/sw, but I have nothing to back that up. Unowned directories are not cool though...
Looking into this a little deeper, it appears to be a common problem.
$ rpm -qf /usr/share/locale/* | grep 'is not owned' | wc -l 162
I wonder if %find_lang is buggy.
In any case, I think I'm going to submit the package as-is. If it is broken, it is no more broken that tuxpaint itself...
Steve
-
Hans de Goede -
Michael Thomas -
Steven Pritchard