[Bug 210467] Review Request: wallpapoz - Gnome Multi Backgrounds and Wallpapers Configuration Tool

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: wallpapoz - Gnome Multi Backgrounds and Wallpapers Configuration Tool


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210467





------- Additional Comments From mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2006-10-16 14:32 EST -------
Well, before reporting to upstream, I want to ask you about..
A.
  By default, this package tries to install xml_processing.py into
  /usr/bin .  This file is called by /usr/bin/daemon_wallpapoz and
  /usr/bin/wallpapoz so usually this file (xml_processing.py) should
  be byte-compiled.
  However, this leaves non-executable files (.pyc and .pyo files)
  in /usr/bin and rpmlint claims about this (non-executable-in-bin).
  Also, by default xml_processing.py has 0644 permission. This is correct
  because xml_processing.py is just called by daemon_wallpapoz and 
  wallpapoz. However, leaving this file (xml_processing.py) under /usr/bin
  also calls rpmlint complaint.

  So I moved xml_processing.py to /usr/share/wallpapoz . However, this is
  somewhat fedora-specific. Also, moving xml_processing.py requires
  some fixes for two other python scripts.

  Then I wonder if I should ask for upstream to move this file 
  (xml_processing.py). I mean that I wonder to what degree I (and upstream)
  should obey the rule of "all files under /usr/bin should be executable" 
  Or just I should leave xml_processing.py under /usr/bin/ , set the permisson
  as 0755 and dont create  xml_processing.py{c,o} ?

B. 
   I usually think that python scripts under /usr/bin should not have the
   name of *.py , however, should I also ask for upstream to rename the files?
  (for this package, renaming .py files in /usr/bin also requires the fixes for
   the contents of wallpapoz.py and daemon_wallpapoz.py).

C.
   This package tries to install all files under /usr directory. This is
   truly bad for rpm building, however, if upstream doesn't care about
   rpm system and only think, I wonder how I should ask for upstream to make
   install.py have something like DESTDIR (upstream may just say,
   "anyway install should be done by root, so this is unnecessary").

In short, all I am concerned is that if I should ask for upstream to
adapt their package to the way which seems somewhat fedora-specific.......

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.