Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: kvirc - KVIrc is a free portable IRC client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492690
Summary: Review Request: kvirc - KVIrc is a free portable IRC client Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: alekcejk@googlemail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc.spec SRPM URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc-4.0-0.5.svn3168.fc10.... Description: KVIrc is a free portable IRC client based on the excellent Qt GUI toolkit. KVirc is being written by Szymon Stefanek and the KVIrc Development Team with the contribution of many IRC addicted developers around the world.
KVIrc 4 built from svn code with Qt4 support and KDE4 integration.
Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1262917
$ rpmlint kvirc.spec kvirc-4.0-0.5.svn3168.fc10.i386.rpm kvirc-debuginfo-4.0-0.5.svn3168.fc10.i386.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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=492690
nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tuxbrewr@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #1 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-03-28 07:16:34 EDT --- *** Bug 451582 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
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=492690
--- Comment #2 from Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com 2009-03-28 08:29:35 EDT --- I see the following problems with the spec:
- %{_datadir}/%{name} is unowned
- Scriptlets are non-standard. Please use standard ones https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets
- It should have date of last commit in release tag, like "0.4.20090320svn3151%{dist}" https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
- A lot of code is GPLv2+. Is there anything that GPLv2-only? Also license contains exceptions, I asked fedora-legal list about it. It seems to me that "GPLv2+ with exceptions" should be used as license field.
And a few minor/cosmetic ones:
- Why does it doing build inside %{_target_platform} dir?
- Use of --vendor "" is not needed.
- You decide to exclude empty files, but are they surely aren’t affect program runtime?
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=492690
--- Comment #3 from Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com 2009-03-28 09:16:26 EDT --- - Shouldn't version be 4.0.0 ?
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=492690
--- Comment #4 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-03-28 10:34:55 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) - Fixed owener of /usr/share/kvirc - Changed release tag and license field
Scriptlets are exactly as on your link. Now builds are in default directory. --vendor "" removed from desktop-file-install.
I didn't notice any difference between kvirc running with /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/ directory and without it.
(In reply to comment #3) Now version 4.0.0.
New spec and srpm Spec URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc.spec SRPM URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc-4.0.0-0.1.20090328svn...
Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1263073
$ rpmlint kvirc-4.0.0-0.1.20090328svn3168.fc10.src.rpm kvirc-4.0.0-0.1.20090328svn3168.fc10.i386.rpm kvirc-debuginfo-4.0.0-0.1.20090328svn3168.fc10.i386.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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=492690
--- Comment #5 from Steven M. Parrish tuxbrewr@fedoraproject.org 2009-03-28 15:31:53 EDT --- Thanks Nucleo for taking this up. The reason I had postponed it was that with 4.0 in development didn't want to package a legacy kde3 based app. You've done a good job getting this working. Here are 2 issues one of which is a showstopper.
1st. Qt4.5 is soon to hit, you need to check with upstream KVIrc devs to make sure the current code base is compatible.
2nd and the show stopper is this
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
I'll keep an eye on this request and complete the review when its ready.
Steven
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=492690
--- Comment #6 from Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com 2009-03-28 15:34:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5)
2nd and the show stopper is this
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
%find_lang is not working in this case. And %{_datadir}/locale/* is not used.
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=492690
--- Comment #7 from Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com 2009-03-28 16:11:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4)
- Fixed owener of /usr/share/kvirc
Following dirs are unowned too: %{_datadir}/%{name}/4.0 %{_datadir}/%{name}/4.0/locale
I didn't notice any difference between kvirc running with /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/ directory and without it.
Seems they are used somehow. Lets bring it back to be closer to upstream and simply ignore rpmlint warnings.
For record, fedora-legal approved usage of exceptions in license field: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2009-March/msg00064.html
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=492690
--- Comment #8 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-03-28 16:14:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5)
1st. Qt4.5 is soon to hit, you need to check with upstream KVIrc devs to make sure the current code base is compatible.
We can wait until Qt 4.5 will be in updates. Scratch builds are already built with Qt 4.5.0 and they are not running in F10 untill Qt 4.5 will be in updates. This build uses Qt 4.4.3: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc-4.0.0-0.1.20090328svn...
2nd and the show stopper is this
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
There is can not be used %find_lang because there are many .mo files with different names. There is not just %{_datadir}/locale/* (in this case rpmlint shows errors caused translation files) but %lang() %{_datadir}/%{name}/4.0/locale/*.mo for every language that's why rpmlint runs without errors.
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=492690
--- Comment #9 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-03-28 17:39:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5)
1st. Qt4.5 is soon to hit, you need to check with upstream KVIrc devs to make sure the current code base is compatible.
As I understood from this ticket https://svn.kvirc.de/kvirc/ticket/375 there is considered possibility to build with Qt 4.5.
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=492690
--- Comment #10 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-03-28 17:55:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7)
Following dirs are unowned too: %{_datadir}/%{name}/4.0 %{_datadir}/%{name}/4.0/locale
Seems they are used somehow. Lets bring it back to be closer to upstream and simply ignore rpmlint warnings.
- Fixed owner of /usr/share/kvirc/4.0 and /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/locale - caps dir included in package
New spec, srpm and i386 rpm
http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc.spec http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc-4.0.0-0.2.20090328svn... http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc-4.0.0-0.2.20090328svn...
$ rpmlint kvirc-4.0.0-0.2.20090328svn3168.fc10.i386.rpm kvirc.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/tool/sharedfilewindow kvirc.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/tool/iograph kvirc.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/tool/filetransferwindow kvirc.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/tool/logview kvirc.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/action/url 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 0 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=492690
Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |atorkhov@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #11 from Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com 2009-04-03 11:47:00 EDT --- Only duplicate files left to fix in this package:
- It lists COPYING, FAQ and README as %doc, but those files simultaneously got installed into %{_datadir}/%{name}. They must be excluded from install.
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=492690
Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |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=492690
--- Comment #12 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-04-04 08:49:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) - Exclude duplicate files - svn snapshot 3172 - BR dbus-devel
Spec URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc.spec SRPM URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc-4.0.0-0.3.20090404svn...
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=492690
--- Comment #13 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-04-04 10:02:12 EDT --- File %{_datadir}/%{name}/4.0/license/COPYING is needed for About window. May be COPYING can be both in %doc and %{_datadir}/%{name}?
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=492690
--- Comment #14 from Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com 2009-04-05 04:29:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13)
File %{_datadir}/%{name}/4.0/license/COPYING is needed for About window. May be COPYING can be both in %doc and %{_datadir}/%{name}?
May be make it a symlink (relative, to prevent rpmlint warning) ?
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=492690
--- Comment #15 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-04-05 07:03:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14)
May be make it a symlink (relative, to prevent rpmlint warning) ?
- symlink to COPYING
Spec URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc.spec SRPM URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc-4.0.0-0.4.20090404svn...
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=492690
--- Comment #16 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-04-06 09:33:23 EDT --- - patch for using standard compiler flags
Spec URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc.spec SRPM URL: http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/pkg-reviews/kvirc/kvirc-4.0.0-0.5.20090404svn...
Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1279476
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=492690
Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #17 from Alexey Torkhov atorkhov@gmail.com 2009-04-08 04:03:17 EDT --- Now everything seems fine. Here is the review:
+ rpmlint output without serious errors: kvirc.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/tool/sharedfilewindow kvirc.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/tool/iograph kvirc.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/tool/filetransferwindow kvirc.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/tool/logview kvirc.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/kvirc/4.0/modules/caps/action/url 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 0 warnings.
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. + File, containing the text of the licenses for the package is included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source. + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture (x86_64). + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. + Spec file handles locales properly (%find_lang doesn't work here). + Package call ldconfig in %post and %postun. + The package does not designed to be relocatable. + A package owns all directories that it creates. + A package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissable content. + Does not contain large documentation files. + Includes only doc files in %doc. + No headers. + No static libraries. + The package does not contain pkgconfig(.pc) files. + If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. + No devel packages. + The package does not contain any .la libtool archives. + Includes %{name}.desktop file. Properly installed with desktop-file-install. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot}. + All filenames in the package are valid UTF-8. + Package builds in mock. + Package functions as described even with QT 4.5. + Scriptlets are sane.
This package is APPROVED.
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=492690
nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #18 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-04-08 05:28:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #17)
Now everything seems fine. Here is the review:
Thank you for review.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: kvirc Short Description: KVIrc is a free portable IRC client Owners: nucleo Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 InitialCC:
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=492690
--- Comment #19 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-04-08 10:41:22 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: kvirc Short Description: KVIrc is a free portable IRC client Owners: nucleo Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC:
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=492690
nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: kvirc - |Review Request: kvirc - |KVIrc is a free portable |Free portable IRC client |IRC client |
--- Comment #20 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2009-04-09 05:33:55 EDT --- New rpmlint warning kvirc.i386: W: name-repeated-in-summary KVIrc
- svn snapshot 3173 - Summary changed to Free portable IRC client
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: kvirc Short Description: Free portable IRC client Owners: nucleo Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC:
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=492690
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #21 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2009-04-09 19:34:23 EDT --- cvs done.
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=492690
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-09 20:32:38 EDT --- kvirc-4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kvirc-4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.fc10
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=492690
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-09 20:37:28 EDT --- kvirc-4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kvirc-4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.fc9
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=492690
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |ON_QA
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-13 15:30:54 EDT --- kvirc-4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update kvirc'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-3501
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=492690
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-13 15:38:18 EDT --- kvirc-4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing-newkey update kvirc'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2009-3553
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=492690
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |496433
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=492690
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lemenkov@gmail.com Alias| |kvirc
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=492690
--- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-21 20:48:03 EDT --- kvirc-4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
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=492690
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.f | |c9 Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
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=492690
--- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-21 21:01:25 EDT --- kvirc-4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
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=492690
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.f |4.0.0-0.6.20090409svn3173.f |c9 |c10
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=492690
nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #28 from nucleo alekcejk@googlemail.com 2011-07-11 23:18:51 EDT --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: kvirc New Branches: el6 Owners: nucleo
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=492690
--- Comment #29 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-07-11 23:36:17 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla