Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: linuxdcpp - linux port of dc++
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Summary: Review Request: linuxdcpp - linux port of dc++ Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: phatina@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: ---
Spec URL: http://phatina.fedorapeople.org/rpms/linuxdcpp.spec SRPM URL: http://phatina.fedorapeople.org/rpms/linuxdcpp-1.1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Can you, please, do a package review for me?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Peter Hatina phatina@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |limburgher@gmail.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com 2012-04-18 10:45:23 EDT --- In progress. . .
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com 2012-04-18 11:43:29 EDT --- Good:
- rpmlint checks return:
inuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/linuxdcpp/Credits.txt The character encoding of this file is not UTF-8. Consider converting it in the specfile's %prep section for example using iconv(1).
Fix.
linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary linuxdcpp Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
Include if this exists.
linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ar/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/bg/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/bs/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ca/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/cs/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/cs/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/da/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/el/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/en_CA/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/en_GB/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/et/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/et/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/fi/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/gl/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/he/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/hr/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/hu/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/id/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/is/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ja/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/km/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ko/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/lt/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/lt/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/lv/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/mk/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ml/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ms/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/nb/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/nl/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/pl/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/pl/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/pt/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/pt/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/pt_BR/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ro/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ro/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ru/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ru/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sk/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sl/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sq/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sr/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sv/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sv/LC_MESSAGES/linuxdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/tr/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/uk/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo linuxdcpp.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/zh_CN/LC_MESSAGES/libdcpp.mo
Use find_lang.
linuxdcpp.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/linuxdcpp.desktop value "Network;P2P;FileTransfer;GTK" for string list key "Categories" in group "Desktop Entry" does not have a sem icolon (';') as trailing character .desktop file is not valid, check with desktop-file-validate
Fix.
And lots of invalid FSF address.
File a bug upstream. Not a blocker, but they should fix it in the next release.
- package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( GPLv2+ ) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR
BuildRequire boost-devel and gettext.
- no unnecessary BR - no locales
See above.
- not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file
So it's the BuildRequires, desktop file, a non-utf8 file, the translations, and maybe a man page.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
--- Comment #3 from Peter Hatina phatina@redhat.com --- Done. Can you have another look?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Peter Hatina phatina@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Still need to BuildRequire boost-devel and gettext, and of course the FSF address stuff, but otherwise ready to go. Fix the BRs and I'll approve.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
--- Comment #5 from Peter Hatina phatina@redhat.com --- Added boost-devel and gettext.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Excellent, approved.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Peter Hatina phatina@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Peter Hatina phatina@redhat.com --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: linuxdcpp New Branches: f16 f17 Owners: phatina
Unretire master, please.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
Unretired.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Do you intend to import and build this at any point?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Steven Sheehy steven.sheehy@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) CC| |steven.sheehy@gmail.com
--- Comment #10 from Steven Sheehy steven.sheehy@gmail.com --- *** Bug 773511 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |msuchy@redhat.com
--- Comment #11 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- Ping! Any progress here?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |phatina@redhat.com Flags| |needinfo?(phatina@redhat.co | |m)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
--- Comment #12 from Upstream Release Monitoring upstream-release-monitoring@fedoraproject.org --- pbrobinson's scratch build of linux-user-chroot?#b7afe5173cbd31b029b027b6f8a14baa5e6ce87a for epel7-archbootstrap and git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/linux-user-chroot?#b7afe5173cbd31b029b027b6f8a14baa5e6ce87a failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12089939
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=813832
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Blocks| |201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Flags|needinfo?(phatina@redhat.co | |m) | Last Closed| |2016-02-08 09:11:19
--- Comment #13 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- No response. Closing as dead review. If you ever want to continue, please resubmit. Package is already marked as retired in pkgdb.
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org