After Bt Builder was approved, I expected to be able to search for it in Gnome Software. So far that hasn't been the case. Is there some delay before it is updated? Have I done something wrong in my appdata file?
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Dennis Payne dulsi@identicalsoftware.com wrote:
After Bt Builder was approved, I expected to be able to search for it in Gnome Software. So far that hasn't been the case. Is there some delay before it is updated? Have I done something wrong in my appdata file?
I had a glance at the spec file. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/btbuilder.git/tree/btbuilder.spec
You MUST run appstream-util validate-relax (in %check or %install) and have BuildRequires: libappstream-glib, to help ensure .appdata.xml file safety and spec-compliance: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData#app-data-validate_usage
This is likely the cause of the problem you are facing.
Anyway there are other issues in your spec file.
You MUST Requires: hicolor-icon-theme since you put files in %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/
You MUST use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS as flags for the compiler or linker!!! https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:RPMMacros?rd=Packaging/RPMMacros#Bu...
You are compiling only with "-g": https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/btbuilder/0.5.11/2.fc26/data/lo...
All this issues should have been reported during the package review :-( Please fix them.
Bye,
Andrea
On Sun, 2016-09-18 at 18:52 +0200, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
You MUST run appstream-util validate-relax (in %check or %install) and have BuildRequires: libappstream-glib, to help ensure .appdata.xml file safety and spec-compliance: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData#app-data-validate_us age
This is likely the cause of the problem you are facing.
Why is this the likely cause of the problem? The appdata.xml validates fine. Does this mean that something special is noted in the rpm when the check is run? If so why do packagers need to run it manually? Why not just make this automatically done when an appdata.xml file is spotted?
(I do plan on fixing this since it was pointed out for ostrichriders. It just seems unlikely to me that this is the problem. I'd rather not put out a new release only to put out a new release again with the actual fix.)
You MUST use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS as flags for the compiler or linker!!! https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:RPMMacros?rd=Packaging/RPMMa cros#Build_flags_macros_and_variables
On the page it says "These macros should be used as flags for the compiler or linker." If you must use those flags, the text should be changed and you should link to it from other pages explaining how to build rpms.
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Dennis Payne dulsi@identicalsoftware.com wrote:
On the page it says "These macros should be used as flags for the compiler or linker." If you must use those flags, the text should be changed and you should link to it from other pages explaining how to build rpms.
-- Dennis Payne dulsi@identicalsoftware.com Roon's Raccoon Sprintladder: https://ideas.lego.com/projects/126010 _______________________________________________ Fedora Games SIG mailing list -- games@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to games-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
For packages which use automake or cmake, the %configure and %cmake macros automatically inject the right compiler flags into the package at configure time.
For packages which _don't_ use automake or cmake and just have a (usually handwritten) makefile, though, you do need to pass %{optflags} in at build time. I agree that the guidelines should be clearer here; I think at some point in the past it was assumed most C/C++ packages would use automake or have a similar configure script.
Anyway, this is my bad for not catching during review. :( Apologies!
Ben Rosser
"BR" == Ben Rosser rosser.bjr@gmail.com writes:
BR> For packages which _don't_ use automake or cmake and just have a BR> (usually handwritten) makefile, though, you do need to pass BR> %{optflags} in at build time. I agree that the guidelines should be BR> clearer here; I think at some point in the past it was assumed most BR> C/C++ packages would use automake or have a similar configure BR> script.
Feel free to suggest a change. It's tough to see what's unclear when you already know what you're doing.
- J<
I emailed Richard Hughes. The data searched by Gnome Software is in appstream-data package. He typically updates it on a bi-monthly basis. So you just have to wait if you add a new package to Fedora.
I have corrected all Andrea's concerns as well.
On Sun, 2016-09-18 at 18:52 +0200, Andrea Musuruane wrote:
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Dennis Payne dulsi@identicalsoftware.com wrote:
After Bt Builder was approved, I expected to be able to search for it in Gnome Software. So far that hasn't been the case. Is there some delay before it is updated? Have I done something wrong in my appdata file?
I had a glance at the spec file. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/btbuilder.git/tree/btbuilder. spec
You MUST run appstream-util validate-relax (in %check or %install) and have BuildRequires: libappstream-glib, to help ensure .appdata.xml file safety and spec-compliance: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData#app-data-validate_us age
This is likely the cause of the problem you are facing.
Anyway there are other issues in your spec file.
You MUST Requires: hicolor-icon-theme since you put files in %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/
You MUST use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS as flags for the compiler or linker!!! https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:RPMMacros?rd=Packaging/RPMMa cros#Build_flags_macros_and_variables
You are compiling only with "-g": https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/btbuilder/0.5.11/2.fc26/ data/logs/x86_64/build.log
All this issues should have been reported during the package review :-( Please fix them.
Bye,
Andrea _______________________________________________ Fedora Games SIG mailing list -- games@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to games-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Andrea Musuruane -
Ben Rosser -
Dennis Payne -
Jason L Tibbitts III