| Summary: | Review request: gtkradiant - Level design program for video games | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Package Reviews | Reporter: | Alberto Chiusole <bebo.sudo> |
| Component: | Review Request | Assignee: | RPM Fusion Package Review <rpmfusion-package-review> |
| Status: | RESOLVED EXPIRED | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | bebo.sudo, hobbes1069, kvolny, rpmfusion-package-review |
| Priority: | P5 | ||
| Version: | Current | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | GNU/Linux | ||
| namespace: | free | ||
| Bug Depends on: | 3007 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 30 | ||
| Attachments: | allow the use of gtkradiant in linux | ||
|
Description
Alberto Chiusole
2013-08-06 00:12:49 CEST
just FYI, we already have Radiant packaged as a part of UFO:AI (ufoai-uforadiant) I'm not sure what is the relation between gtkradiant and uforadiant, but it would be nice not to duplicate code please, would you be willing to do some research whether it'd be possible to have only one package including the editor itself and to provide standalone game data as separate package(s) to it, rather than having two packages with similar (functionally same) executables/libraries and one (both) of them bundling the game data? I installed and executed uforadiant on my system but it seems to require ufoai anyhow; here a screenshot: http://www.pikky.net/uploads/acc2a3c852eb354bb54021fdd1266221e6f0053f.png If i continue the exec freezes. So I think it's impossible to work with uforadiant and other gamepacks different from ufoai. Gtkradiant is a fork of Q3radiant, the official map editor included with various versions of Quake, as it can be seen in the original code of Quake III Arena, for example here: https://github.com/id-Software/Quake-III-Arena/tree/master/q3radiant Gtkradiant is also more developed, because it support many gamepacks, instead than a single one like uforadiant, for example. For more info and for the list of supoported games here's the wikipedia related page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GtkRadiant#Supported_games I've searched for a ufoai gamepack to be added in the gtkradiant gamepacks and it seems to be one, here the complete page for all the gamepacks: http://svn.icculus.org/gtkradiant-gamepacks/ greetings, Alberto Hi all, I wrote again to Gtkradiant ML about the permission errors[1] but the upstream doesn't want to solve this problem, due to an enormous work in the code, which obviously they don't want to do. A friend of mine helped me to patch the code to read and write the code in the hidden folder "~/.radiant/". Now the the exec reads the sdk(s) from the folder above and at the startup the data has to be in the user folder, so I'm going to create a script to do this. I will also split the sdk-data in another package, to manage them better. Alberto [1]: http://icculus.org/pipermail/gtkradiant/2013-September/011887.html Created attachment 1197 [details]
allow the use of gtkradiant in linux
Hi! SRPM: http://sourceforge.net/projects/bebosudo-rpms/files/gtkradiant/F19/SRPMS/gtkradiant-1.6.4-1.20131031git.fc19.src.rpm/download SPEC: http://sourceforge.net/projects/bebosudo-rpms/files/gtkradiant/gtkradiant.spec/download This is a fresh build of gtkradiant with some interesting improvements. Here an extract trom the spec: - added gtkradiant manual from the official website - added LGPL and BSD to license field (see LICENSE file inside doc) - added patch to allow the use of gtkradiant also on linux, else it wouldn't work, due to permissions errors (goo.gl/G8xPKg) - added a script launcher to fix the gamepacks - split data in another package - added libjped-turbo-devel as a buildrequire and here the rpmlint on all the packages: $ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/x86_64/gtkradiant-{,debuginfo-}1.6.4-1.20131030git.fc19.x86_64.rpm ../SRPMS/gtkradiant-1.6.4-1.20131030git.fc19.src.rpm gtkradiant.spec gtkradiant.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/gtkradiant-1.6.4/GPL The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. gtkradiant.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/gtkradiant-1.6.4/LGPL The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. gtkradiant.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary q3map2 Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. gtkradiant.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary q3map2_urt Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. gtkradiant.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gtkradiant Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. gtkradiant-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources This debuginfo package appears to contain debug symbols but no source files. This is often a sign of binaries being unexpectedly stripped too early during the build, or being compiled without compiler debug flags (which again often is a sign of distro's default compiler flags ignored which might have security consequences), or other compiler flags which result in rpmbuild's debuginfo extraction not working as expected. Verify that the binaries are not unexpectedly stripped and that the intended compiler flags are used. (none): E: no installed packages by name ../SRPMS/gtkradiant-1.6.4-1.20131030git.fc19.src.rpm gtkradiant.spec: W: invalid-url Source5: gtkradiant-manual-20131030.tar.gz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 4 warnings. The first two depend on the upstream license version. the third and fourth don't have a manual page because are small utilities, and the fifth, the gtkradiant exec, has an huge manual page in the %doc, so I don't know why rpmlint complains. sixth I don't know what to do. seventh is right, because the source is made manually. I know there is a lot of work to do, but would really appreciate it if someone was interested in helping me. Thanks, Alberto Filled the bug 3007 for the data package. Have a look at it. Bye! Wrong paste is last comment... Closing due to inactivity, please reopen if you want to pursue this review request. Don't know why Richard closed my review request. I noticed only now. Reopened because is still valid. If someone is interested please reply. I'll pay more attention on emails from rpmfusion. (In reply to comment #9) > Don't know why Richard closed my review request. > I noticed only now. Umm... I explained it when I closed the ticket. The long version is that I was trying to clean up the review requests and close any stagnant tickets. If you'd like to pursue getting this package then that's great, but a long list of review requests doesn't help people know which ones are worth putting their time and effort into. While it's not impossible to get sponsored on RPM Fusion first, it's not typical. If you were to be sponsored in Fedora then you would automatically be sponsored here. Especially right now with the infrastructure upgrades tying up people. If you haven't already please review: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group The same rules apply here. Because your sponsor is ultimately responsible for your packages if you break something or leave, we really like to see more than just a single review request before deciding to sponsor someone. There is a new release, please update before submitting for review. http://icculus.org/gtkradiant/ Also can you answear the question asked in rfbz#3007 ? |
