[Bug 2324911] New: Review Request: fheroes2 - Free implementation of the popular game engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Bug ID: 2324911 Summary: Review Request: fheroes2 - Free implementation of the popular game engine Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: lemenkov@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2.spec SRPM URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc41.src.rpm Description: This open source multiplatform project, written from scratch, is designed to reproduce the original game with significant improvements in gameplay, graphics and logic (including support for high-resolution graphics, improved AI, numerous fixes and user interface improvements), breathing new life into one of the most addictive turn-based strategy games. Fedora Account System Username: peter
Koji scratchbuild for Rawhide:
* https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=125665672
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- Updated package, the same links:
Spec URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2.spec SRPM URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc41.src.rpm
Koji scratch build for Rawhide:
* https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=125672450
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://github.com/ihhub/fh | |eroes2
--- Comment #2 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8235819 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- Validated desktop-file, the same links:
Spec URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2.spec SRPM URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc41.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #4 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8235829 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2056696 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2056696&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8235829 to 8235859
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |AutomationTriaged
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8235859 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |benson_muite@emailplus.org CC| |benson_muite@emailplus.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #7 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- Improved licensing information, the same links:
Spec URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2.spec SRPM URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc41.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2056809 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2056809&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8235859 to 8238163
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8238163 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #10 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic: [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later", "GNU General Public License, Version 2", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License, Version 2", "ISC License", "*No copyright* ISC License", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0". 331 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/fheroes2/2324911-fheroes2/licensecheck.txt [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128, /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 152527 bytes in 2 files. [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [ ]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 4843520 bytes in /usr/share [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm fheroes2-debuginfo-1.1.3-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm fheroes2-debugsource-1.1.3-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc42.src.rpm ================================= rpmlint session starts ================================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpxr42kor1')] checks: 32, packages: 4
fheroes2.spec:24: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(libsmacker) fheroes2.src: E: spelling-error ('gameplay', '%description -l en_US gameplay -> game play, game-play, nameplate') fheroes2.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('gameplay', '%description -l en_US gameplay -> game play, game-play, nameplate') fheroes2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fheroes2 fheroes2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fheroes2.bin fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/be.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/bg.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/cs.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/de.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/dk.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/es.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/fr.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/hu.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/it.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/lt.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/nb.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/nl.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/pl.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/pt.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/ro.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/ru.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/sk.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/sv.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/tr.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/uk.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/vi.mo 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 24 warnings, 18 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 7.9 s
Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: fheroes2-debuginfo-1.1.3-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm ================================= rpmlint session starts ================================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpjk0hyai8')] checks: 32, packages: 1
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 3.0 s
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 3
fheroes2.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/bin/fheroes2.bin /lib64/libSDL2_image-2.0.so.0 fheroes2.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('gameplay', '%description -l en_US gameplay -> game play, game-play, nameplate') fheroes2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fheroes2 fheroes2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fheroes2.bin fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/be.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/bg.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/cs.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/de.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/dk.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/es.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/fr.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/hu.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/it.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/lt.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/nb.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/nl.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/pl.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/pt.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/ro.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/ru.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/sk.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/sv.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/tr.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/uk.mo fheroes2.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/fheroes2/files/lang/vi.mo 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 24 warnings, 14 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 7.1 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/archive/1.1.3/fheroes2-1.1.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f91760f7e8a512fa4b2b5eb02d852d358106fca50faa13db942d8314926ca6d8 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f91760f7e8a512fa4b2b5eb02d852d358106fca50faa13db942d8314926ca6d8
Requires -------- fheroes2 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/bash autodownloader libSDL2-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libSDL2_image-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libSDL2_mixer-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.15)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.7)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) libz.so.1(ZLIB_1.2.0)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH)
fheroes2-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
fheroes2-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
Provides -------- fheroes2: application() application(fheroes2.desktop) bundled(libsmacker) fheroes2 fheroes2(x86-64) metainfo() metainfo(fheroes2.metainfo.xml)
fheroes2-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) fheroes2-debuginfo fheroes2-debuginfo(x86-64)
fheroes2-debugsource: fheroes2-debugsource fheroes2-debugsource(x86-64)
Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2324911 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Ocaml, Perl, SugarActivity, PHP, fonts, Python, Haskell, R, Java Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Comments: a) To ensure directory ownership, please add Requires: hicolor-icon-theme b) Please validate the appdata file, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/#_app_data... add BuildRequires: libappstream-glib appstream-util validate-relax --nonet %{buildroot}%{_metainfodir}/*.metainfo.xml c) Please use the %find_lang for translation files, see: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#handling_locale_f... d) Ideally translation files should be in %{_datadir}/locale/a%{locale}/LC_MESSAGES/%{name}.mo
My need patches for https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/src/fheroes2/system/settings.c... https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/CMakeLists.txt#L87-L96 Not sure if a blocker though, coupled to point c. e) Can a man page be generated: https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/docs/fheroes2.6.in f) Maybe add a smoke test fheros2 --version g) Does the license file https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/files/soundfonts/GeneralUser-G... also need to be indicated? h) Is there a license for https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/files/data/resurrection.h2d
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #11 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #10)
Comments: a) To ensure directory ownership, please add Requires: hicolor-icon-theme
Done.
b) Please validate the appdata file, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/ #_app_data_validate_usage add BuildRequires: libappstream-glib appstream-util validate-relax --nonet %{buildroot}%{_metainfodir}/*.metainfo.xml
Done.
c) Please use the %find_lang for translation files, see: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ #handling_locale_files
...
d) Ideally translation files should be in %{_datadir}/locale/a%{locale}/LC_MESSAGES/%{name}.mo
My need patches for https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/src/fheroes2/system/settings. cpp#L525 https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/CMakeLists.txt#L87-L96 Not sure if a blocker though, coupled to point c.
Yeah, a way of dealing with locale data in this game engine is not entirely standard. I'll try to convince upstream to move them into common directories (```/usr/share/locale```). Meanwhile maybe it's better to keep it as is?
e) Can a man page be generated: https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/docs/fheroes2.6.in
Done. Thanks for pointing me out! I was not aware of this one.
f) Maybe add a smoke test fheros2 --version
Requires display and working keyboard and mice.
g) Does the license file https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/files/soundfonts/GeneralUser- GS-LICENSE.txt also need to be indicated?
I don't think so - it is a requirement for Windows installer. We have working SDL_Mixer and we're good.
h) Is there a license for https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/files/data/resurrection.h2d
I guess the same GPLv2 since it was added in this PR:
* https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/pull/3828/ * https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/pull/3828/commits/a8e84e32f307f858e171b4bb...
I asked upstream about the status of this particular data artifact - https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/issues/9267.
New package, the same links:
Spec URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2.spec SRPM URL: https://peter.fedorapeople.org/packages/fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc41.src.rpm
Koji scratch build for Rawhide:
* https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=125746117
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2057058 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2057058&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8238163 to 8241593
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8241593 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #14 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Chromium does put locale files in a different location: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/chromium/blob/rawhide/f/chromium.spec#_18...
Maybe the guidelines need an update?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #15 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #14)
Chromium does put locale files in a different location: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/chromium/blob/rawhide/f/chromium. spec#_1821
Maybe the guidelines need an update?
We have more locale offenders - vim-enhanced for example. But I don't think we need to fix guidelines. Much better to propose a change to upstream eventually.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #16 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- (In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #11)
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #10)
Comments:
...
h) Is there a license for https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/blob/master/files/data/resurrection.h2d
I guess the same GPLv2 since it was added in this PR:
https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/pull/3828/commits/ a8e84e32f307f858e171b4bbea7cacb2debdadf6
I asked upstream about the status of this particular data artifact - https://github.com/ihhub/fheroes2/issues/9267.
Upstream confirmed that this blob is licensed under GPL-2.0-or-later as the source code.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #17 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Thanks. Approved.
Review of one of Skia (requires some interaction with upstream to set soname) - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2325835
cproc - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2325154 chibicc - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2325026
would be appreciated if time allows.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #18 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #17)
Thanks. Approved.
Thank you!
Review of one of Skia (requires some interaction with upstream to set soname) - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2325835
cproc - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2325154 chibicc - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2325026
would be appreciated if time allows.
On my way!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |RELEASE_PENDING
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fheroes2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RELEASE_PENDING |MODIFIED
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657 (fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RELEASE_PENDING |MODIFIED
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657 (fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-4217b165ca (fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc40) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-4217b165ca
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-b5f63443ae (fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc39) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-b5f63443ae
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RELEASE_PENDING |MODIFIED
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657 (fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-4217b165ca (fheroes2-1.1.3-1.fc40) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-4217b165ca
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-4217b165ca has been pushed to the Fedora 40 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-4217b165ca *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-4217b165ca
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-b5f63443ae has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-b5f63443ae *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-b5f63443ae
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657 has been pushed to the Fedora 41 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-da9fb9a657
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-18baeff1d0 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-18baeff1d0` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-18baeff1d0
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-ce9cc2ecb3 has been pushed to the Fedora 41 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-ce9cc2ecb3` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-ce9cc2ecb3
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Last Closed| |2024-12-06 01:36:40
--- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-18baeff1d0 (fheroes2-1.1.4-1.fc40) has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2324911
--- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-ce9cc2ecb3 (fheroes2-1.1.4-1.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com