Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328
Summary: Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: drizt@land.ru QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: ---
Hello. I allready have experience with packaging for Fedora.
Spec URL: https://github.com/RussianFedora/psi-plus/blob/5444787be737b51acc4f776b3bc82... SRPM URL: http://koji.russianfedora.ru/packages/psi-plus/0.15/0.18.20110530svn3954.fc1... Description: Psi+ - Psi IM Mod by psi-dev@conference.jabber.ru
koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3101902
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=709328
Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review?
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=709328
Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |
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=709328
Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mariobl@freenet.de
--- Comment #1 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-06-04 13:43:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0)
Hello. I allready have experience with packaging for Fedora.
Does this mean, you are already a member of the Fedora packagers group? If no, you need a sponsor, even if you have built packages for RussianFedora.
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=709328
--- Comment #2 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-04 13:52:04 EDT --- Sure, I member of the Fedora packagers group. You can see my packages mingw32-dbus and qconf.
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=709328
nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |496433(RussianFedoraRemix)
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=709328
--- Comment #3 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-06-04 14:01:42 EDT --- Sorry for the noise. But your "declaration" was somewhat odd. In most cases, it is a sign that a new packager has arrived, who needs a sponsor and didn't thought about the FE-NEEDSPONSOR blocker.
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=709328
--- Comment #4 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-04 14:06:15 EDT --- No problem. You are right. Really odd. Thanks for elaboration.
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=709328
--- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-06-04 14:06:43 EDT --- To make the spec link really downloadable, you should use the following one:
Spec URL: https://github.com/RussianFedora/psi-plus/raw/master/psi-plus.spec
Then a reviewer don't have to figure out how he/she can fetch the html content as a spec file.
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=709328
--- Comment #6 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-04 14:16:56 EDT --- Is it important? Anyway I think that really important to use link with certain commit. For example, use https://github.com/RussianFedora/psi-plus/raw/5444787be737b51acc4f776b3bc823... instead of https://github.com/RussianFedora/psi-plus/raw/master/psi-plus.spec
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=709328
--- Comment #7 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-06-04 16:15:14 EDT --- The certain commit isn't important for me actually. In fact, I prefer to right-click on a link and choose "Link target save as" or something similar. In our case, I get a html file. Most newly to be reviewed packages don't have a version control yet anyway.
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=709328
--- Comment #8 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-05 01:34:52 EDT --- Ok. I will use direct link.
Can you do review?
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=709328
Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #9 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-06-05 06:47:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8)
Can you do review?
Of course, I can. Perhaps we can do a review swap? You'll find my unreviewed packages here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Fe...
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=709328
--- Comment #10 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-06-05 13:08:48 EDT --- Created attachment 503103 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=503103 rpmlint output for all available packages and subpackages
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=709328
--- Comment #11 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-06-05 13:44:37 EDT --- The rpmlint output is 548 lines long, that's why I've attached it.
Some initial issues:
The License declaration GPLv2+1 doesn't exist. The file src/main.cpp is GPLv2+. What does the additional "1" mean?
The "Packager:" line isn't used in Fedora.
Where do you've got the skins, icons and themes from? I don't see any licensing info about them. And moreover, why do you use them as additional sources and split them again into subpackages? In my mind, it would be better to package them separately, because the main package doesn't need them mandatory.
You can "qt-devel" drop from BuildRequires, the "qtwebkit-devel" depends on it anyway.
psi-plus.desktop isn't properly installed, look here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usag...
The FSF address is incorrect in the source files. Not worth a patch, but worth a upstream bug report tough.
If you would call %configure instead of ./configure, you could drop the four lines which define the macros for install locations.
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=709328
Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mariobl@freenet.de
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=709328
Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |raphgro@web.de
--- Comment #12 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-06-05 16:27:49 EDT --- As a regular user of Fedora, I am very interested in seeing an official package for psi-plus. Though, I am no contributor of packages.
There's already a Fedora package for psi that is fully open source (GPL), as far as I understand. Psi-plus is thereby based on the source of psi but has a big amount of patches that have to be licensed separately. Further, psi development seems to be nearly dead at the moment, so it should be appreciated that a development is going on with those "semi-official" patches as a branch(?) of the mainstream source.
Maybe RPMFusion or similiar is a better place for such a package if there are licence issues. Fedora won't accept any package with any non-free content in it.
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=709328
--- Comment #13 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-06-05 16:41:43 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12)
Maybe RPMFusion or similiar is a better place for such a package if there are licence issues. Fedora won't accept any package with any non-free content in it.
I'm unsure if we speak about non-free content here. But I see there are additional sources for which we have to point out the license. If it should be really proprietary or the distribution of those parts is restricted in any other way, you are right, then Fedora cannot ship it. In that case, RPMfusion would be an option.
Moreover, there is the question whether psi-plus affects the original psi package in some way...?
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=709328
--- Comment #14 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-06-06 17:33:53 EDT --- I don't see any reason why someone should use both psi and psi-plus in parallel. In my opinion, psi-plus obsoletes psi.
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=709328
--- Comment #15 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-06-07 13:18:21 EDT --- Could you provide for each source an url where it is from?
<snip> Source0: http://koji.russianfedora.ru/storage/psi-plus/%%7Bname%7D-%%7Bversion%7D-201... Source1: iconsets.tar.bz2 Source2: language_ru.tar.bz2 Source3: skins.tar.bz2 Source4: themes.tar.bz2 </snip>
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=709328
--- Comment #16 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-16 11:43:16 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11)
The rpmlint output is 548 lines long, that's why I've attached it.
Some initial issues:
The License declaration GPLv2+1 doesn't exist. The file src/main.cpp is GPLv2+. What does the additional "1" mean?
This is jusr misspeling. Actually it used GPLv2, LGPLv2 and BeerWare licenses.
Where do you've got the skins, icons and themes from? I don't see any licensing info about them.
This difficult question. Developers of Psi+ don't care about license cleaning. Sad but true. I trying to find sources of this resources.
And moreover, why do you use them as additional sources and split them again into subpackages? In my mind, it would be better to package them separately, because the main package doesn't need them mandatory.
Often this resources updates. By this reason I always build one common package. It's more comfortable for me. It's difficult to wathcing for updates resources.
You can "qt-devel" drop from BuildRequires, the "qtwebkit-devel" depends on it anyway.
Old version of Fedora haven't qtwebkit-devel package. While I want to have a compatible with it.
psi-plus.desktop isn't properly installed, look here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usag...
Oh damn :(. Sources have a psi.desktop file. When is bening installed this file copying with name psi-plus.desktop in application dir. I don't know what I should do in such case. Is maybe desktop-file-validate can help me?
The FSF address is incorrect in the source files. Not worth a patch, but worth a upstream bug report tough.
I have talk with Rion (upstream developer). It don't interesting for him.
If you would call %configure instead of ./configure, you could drop the four lines which define the macros for install locations.
I might use only ./configure. It non-auntoconf ./configure. qconf-qt4 generates non-compatible ./configure script.
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=709328
--- Comment #17 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-16 11:46:50 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12)
Maybe RPMFusion or similiar is a better place for such a package if there are licence issues. Fedora won't accept any package with any non-free content in it.
Atm Russian Fedora provide this package. I don't want to use RPMFussion or any other similar Repo.
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=709328
--- Comment #18 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-16 11:52:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14)
I don't see any reason why someone should use both psi and psi-plus in parallel. In my opinion, psi-plus obsoletes psi.
Conflicts don't allowed in Fedora distribution. It's very uncomfortable when one package server as a noise to other.
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=709328
--- Comment #19 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-16 11:53:50 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15)
Could you provide for each source an url where it is from?
<snip> Source0: http://koji.russianfedora.ru/storage/psi-plus/%{name}-%{version}-20110530svn3954.tar.bz2 Source1: iconsets.tar.bz2 Source2: language_ru.tar.bz2 Source3: skins.tar.bz2 Source4: themes.tar.bz2 </snip>
It haven't url. I got it all from https://psi-dev.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/.
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=709328
--- Comment #20 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-21 09:56:29 EDT --- https://raw.github.com/RussianFedora/psi-plus/652e93ddb2878a1d091ce0f97b23e5... http://koji.russianfedora.ru/koji/getfile?taskID=5826&name=psi-plus-0.15...
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=709328
--- Comment #21 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-06-30 15:32:17 EDT --- Maybe add bug #177841 as blocker to get more publicity :)
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=709328
--- Comment #22 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-06-30 15:48:20 EDT --- Good joke :)
Now we moving to github and use altered repositories for resources and patches. So I can separate all resources to new package.
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=709328
Minh Ngo nlminhtl@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nlminhtl@gmail.com
--- Comment #23 from Minh Ngo nlminhtl@gmail.com 2011-11-12 05:42:17 EST --- URL for *.src.rpm packages are broken
Icons https://psi-dev.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/iconsets/clients/default/ are under Freeware license and must be deleted from the package.
Please look http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#SoftwareLicenses for more information.
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=709328
--- Comment #24 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-12-20 15:24:44 EST --- Could you provide new packages for git?
There are some important fixes, incl. modifications for QtWebkit 2.2 :)
See also bug #757492.
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=709328
Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(drizt@land.ru)
--- Comment #25 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-12-22 12:08:37 EST --- Tried to build rev 20111221git5158 with files from github.com/RussianFedora/psi-plus ...
g++ -Wl,-O1 -shared -o libtranslateplugin.so translateplugin.o -L/usr/lib64 -lQtXml -lQtGui -lQtCore -lpthread translateplugin.o: file not recognized: File truncated collect2: ld gab 1 als Ende-Status zur?ck make: *** [libtranslateplugin.so] Fehler 1 Fehler: Fehler-Status beim Beenden von /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.hNl26N (%build)
Fehler beim Bauen des RPM: Fehler-Status beim Beenden von /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.hNl26N (%build)
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=709328
--- Comment #26 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-12-22 16:09:36 EST --- Scratch build for rev 20111221git5158 with files from github.com/RussianFedora/psi-plus
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3601956
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=709328
--- Comment #27 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-12-22 16:12:10 EST --- Add BuildRequires libicu-devel to psi-plus.spec
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=709328
Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(drizt@land.ru) |
--- Comment #28 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-12-23 20:36:17 EST --- What for is need libicu-devel?
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=709328
--- Comment #29 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-12-24 08:22:37 EST --- (In reply to comment #28)
What for is need libicu-devel?
From koji build.log:
Unable to load library icui18n "Cannot load library icui18n: (libicui18n.so.46: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory)"
$ yum info libicu Name : libicu Zusammenfassung : International Components for Unicode - libraries URL : http://www.icu-project.org/ Lizenz : MIT and UCD and Public Domain Beschreibung : The International Components for Unicode (ICU) libraries provide : robust and full-featured Unicode services on a wide variety of : platforms. ICU supports the most current version of the Unicode : standard, and they provide support for supplementary Unicode : characters (needed for GB 18030 repertoire support). : As computing environments become more heterogeneous, software : portability becomes more important. ICU lets you produce the same : results across all the various platforms you support, without : sacrificing performance. It offers great flexibility to extend : and customize the supplied services.
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=709328
--- Comment #30 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2011-12-24 15:33:59 EST --- (In reply to comment #29) (In reply to comment #28)
What for is need libicu-devel?
The dependency to libicu is a (potential) bug in Qt package. Please take a look at bug #759923 for more information.
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=709328
--- Comment #31 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-12-30 04:41:21 EST --- Hm ... I've separated resources. Now psi-plus package doesn't content any stuff with non-free licenses. Furthemore I've explain all licenses which exist in psi-plus sources.
Spec URL: https://github.com/downloads/drizt/psi-plus/psi-plus.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/downloads/drizt/psi-plus/psi-plus-0.15-0.23.20111220git51... Description: Psi+ - Psi IM Mod by psi-dev@conference.jabber.ru
koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3610672
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=709328
--- Comment #32 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2011-12-31 23:01:13 EST --- $ rpmlint psi-plus-0.15-0.23.20111220git5157.fc15.src.rpm psi-plus.src: W: invalid-license LGPLv2.1+ psi-plus.src: W: invalid-license MIT/X11 psi-plus.src: W: invalid-license zlib/libpng psi-plus.src: W: strange-permission generate-tarball.sh 0755L psi-plus.src:207: W: macro-in-comment %doc psi-plus.src:207: W: macro-in-comment %files psi-plus.src: W: invalid-url Source1: language_ru.tar.bz2 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.
$ rpmlint psi-plus-0.15-0.23.20111220git5157.fc15.i686.rpm psi-plus.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.15-0.23.20111220git5157 ['1:0.15-0.23.20111220git5157.fc15', '1:0.15-0.23.20111220git5157'] psi-plus.i686: W: invalid-license LGPLv2.1+ psi-plus.i686: W: invalid-license MIT/X11 psi-plus.i686: W: invalid-license zlib/libpng psi-plus.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/psi-plus-0.15/COPYING psi-plus.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary psi-plus 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings.
$ rpmlint psi-plus-plugins-0.15-0.23.20111220git5157.fc15.i686.rpm psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Autoreply -> Auto reply, Auto-reply, Reputably psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Captcha -> Catchall psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US captcha -> catchall psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vCards -> v Cards, cards, canards psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iconsets -> icon sets, icon-sets, consents psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US submenu -> sub menu, sub-menu, submerse psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Gmail -> Gail, Mail, Email psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Juick -> Buick, Juice, Juicy psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US microblogging -> micro blogging, micro-blogging, microbiological psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US popup -> pop up, pop-up, popular psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qip -> Sip, Nip, Rip psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Screenshot -> Screen shot, Screen-shot, Screens hot psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US screenshot -> screen shot, screen-shot, screens hot psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Yandex -> Spandex psi-plus-plugins.i686: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 15 warnings.
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=709328
Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #503103|0 |1 is obsolete| |
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=709328
Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
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=709328
Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |
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=709328
--- Comment #33 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-16 11:11:22 EST --- Added %{?_isa} to requires SPEC: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/a3b0ef2f114c1ec34316a5f17f35ad... SRPM: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/a3b0ef2f114c1ec34316a5f17f35ad...
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=709328
--- Comment #34 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-16 11:51:49 EST --- Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3706229
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=709328
--- Comment #35 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-16 12:12:45 EST --- less warnings in rpmlint SPEC: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/0d3891139a7eb9d98fee04e49ff929... SRPM: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/0d3891139a7eb9d98fee04e49ff929...
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=709328
--- Comment #36 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-16 12:23:45 EST --- Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3706346
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=709328
--- Comment #37 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-19 10:40:37 EST --- clarified qt version in BuildRequires
SPEC: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/15d0c16486e474dcb92036b9435e75... SRPM: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/15d0c16486e474dcb92036b9435e75... Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3715099
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=709328
Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|mario.blaettermann@gmail.co |nobody@fedoraproject.org |m |
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=709328
Volker Fröhlich volker27@gmx.at changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |volker27@gmx.at
--- Comment #38 from Volker Fröhlich volker27@gmx.at 2012-01-25 08:12:09 EST --- Are you bundling minizip and zlib here?
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=709328
--- Comment #39 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-25 08:37:00 EST --- What you want to say?
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=709328
--- Comment #40 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-25 08:39:38 EST --- hm ... sourcents contents minizip
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=709328
--- Comment #41 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-25 13:48:57 EST --- minizip came from original psi. psi package for Fedora contents minizip too. I agree psi-plus should use minizip as shared library instead of minizip as part of psi sources. I would keep this issue for future.
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=709328
--- Comment #42 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-25 13:51:50 EST --- Atm I'm working with fsf incorrect address.
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=709328
--- Comment #43 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2012-01-25 14:05:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #41)
I agree psi-plus should use minizip as shared library instead of minizip as part of psi sources.
Qt ships an own libpng internally. It can be disabled by usage of #define for building and #ifdef in the Qt sources then takes care of that issue. Fedora is using this feature cause the guys decided to stay with an old libpng for a long time, don't ask me for details and it will be definetely off-topic here. Maybe something similiar can be done for minizip usage in psi sources.
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=709328
--- Comment #44 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-26 04:18:46 EST --- Really psi-plus uses system minizip if exists. For this it enough to add minizip-devel to BuildRequires.
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=709328
--- Comment #45 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-26 08:56:51 EST --- SPEC: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/2172137b0b3acf9958c1b8a901d93d... SRPM: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/2172137b0b3acf9958c1b8a901d93d... Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3734631
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=709328
Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |martin.gieseking@uos.de
--- Comment #46 from Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de 2012-01-26 09:55:20 EST --- (In reply to comment #44)
Really psi-plus uses system minizip if exists. For this it enough to add minizip-devel to BuildRequires.
It's not sufficient to add BR: minizip-devel. You must explicitly remove the bundled code in the %prep section: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Treatment_Of_Bundled_Libraries#Packa...
This probably also applies to the qca stuff.
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=709328
--- Comment #47 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-26 10:24:30 EST --- Hm ... I can't understand why I MUST remove the bundled code in the %prep section?
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=709328
--- Comment #48 from Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de 2012-01-26 10:40:42 EST --- It's necessary to ensure that none of the bundled source files are involved in the build process. Adding BR: minizip-devel might lead to the expected result, but it's always possible that bundled header or configuration files are unintentionally incorporated in the build process. To prevent this reliably, the removal of the bundled library code is required.
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=709328
--- Comment #49 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-26 13:38:19 EST --- done.
SPEC: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/b3ebe651b11700e7ddce4ae6a2a453... SRPM: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/b3ebe651b11700e7ddce4ae6a2a453... Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3737814
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=709328
--- Comment #50 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-28 11:50:30 EST --- psi-plus package provides bundled iris library because it always uses last version. So I can't use system iris. SPEC: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/19d218b9247586584ca31ad65889a4...
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=709328
Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jussi.lehtola@iki.fi
--- Comment #51 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi 2012-01-28 11:56:59 EST --- (In reply to comment #50)
psi-plus package provides bundled iris library because it always uses last version. So I can't use system iris.
Then either you need to make sure that you're always using the version of iris required, or ask the Fedora Packaging Committee for a bundled library exception.
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=709328
--- Comment #52 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu 2012-01-28 12:10:16 EST --- fwiw, the iris packaging in fedora at the moment *is* (or should be) the latest available in upstream svn. However, some apps that bundle it seem to use headers that are private to iris, and not part of the exported api. (Same problem exists in psi already in fedora). Is this the case here, or is it something else?
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=709328
--- Comment #53 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-29 04:39:52 EST --- (In reply to comment #51)
Then either you need to make sure that you're always using the version of iris required, or ask the Fedora Packaging Committee for a bundled library exception.
Psi+ patches modify original iris from github. So I think it is sufficient reason to grant exception. I will ask to Fedora Packaging Committee for exception.
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=709328
--- Comment #54 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-29 04:53:19 EST --- I opened exception issue https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/779
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=709328
Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rc040203@freenet.de
--- Comment #55 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2012-01-29 16:23:37 EST --- (In reply to comment #53)
Psi+ patches modify original iris from github.
Please explain in detail why they are doing so.
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=709328
--- Comment #56 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) pahan@hubbitus.info 2012-01-30 09:22:15 EST --- Yes, and why did not send patches back to upstream?
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=709328
--- Comment #57 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu 2012-01-30 09:32:20 EST --- Those questions (and answers) will hopefully get answered in the fpc iris bundling exception request, https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/137
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=709328
--- Comment #58 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-30 10:57:43 EST --- (In reply to comment #56)
Yes, and why did not send patches back to upstream?
Because ask Rion why he didn't send patches to himself. ;)
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=709328
--- Comment #59 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2012-01-30 13:56:07 EST --- I can't modify the fields "Blocks", "Depends on" or "See also" of this bug. So, here is the direct link for the original problem in psi package. Only for the sake of completeness.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737304
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=709328
--- Comment #60 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-01-30 21:36:33 EST --- - explicity removed bundled qca SPEC: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/3b0475254c17caa4204824bd700f37... SRPM: https://raw.github.com/drizt/psi-plus-package/3b0475254c17caa4204824bd700f37... Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3747622
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=709328
--- Comment #61 from Raphael Groner raphgro@web.de 2012-03-11 12:33:26 EDT --- Is it possible to get OTR included? Please consider the patch in ArchLinux forum.
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=134458
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=709328
--- Comment #62 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-03-11 12:41:53 EDT --- I afraid it is imposible to get psi-plus included in Fedora.
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=709328
--- Comment #63 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 16:31:05 EDT --- Raphael, in general, if you want a feature, get it upstream, carrying downstream feature patches are far from ideal.
I'm on jabber now to try to contact psi-plus devs about bundled iris.
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=709328
--- Comment #64 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 16:39:55 EDT --- rats, I'm getting errors trying to send to psi-dev@conference.jabber.ru atm. :( I'll try posting on their forum I guess.
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=709328
Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |psi-plus
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=709328
--- Comment #65 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 16:51:16 EDT --- and, my forum post is being held for moderation. frustrating. (but hopeful).
Here's a copy of my post (for posterity):
hi, I'm involved in trying to bring psi-plus to fedora (see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=psi-plus ). I'd already worked to package iris separately, using sources from http://delta.affinix.com/iris/ , but one issue here is that it bundles a modified copy of iris library.
What is the relationship between psi/isis @ affinix.com and psi+ ? What modifications have been made to (affinix) iris, and more importantly, any immediate or long-term plans to upstream these back affinix? Would you be open to the possibility of downstream distros to be able to ship a common/unbundled iris library for application consumers (like psi, psi+, tomahawk, kopete, etc...)?
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=709328
--- Comment #66 from Ivan Romanov drizt@land.ru 2012-03-12 05:24:34 EDT --- Hi, Rex. I've posted your message on psi-dev conference.
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=709328
--- Comment #67 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu 2012-03-12 10:56:39 EDT --- Is it active only at certain times of the day? I just tried to post, and it failed again.
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=709328
--- Comment #68 from Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu 2012-03-12 11:44:32 EDT --- ok, my bad, seems psi-dev@conference.jabber.ru is a 'groupchat', I need to figure out how to do that in telepathy (using psi now).
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla