| Summary: | Review request: pianobar - Console-based client for Pandora | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Package Reviews | Reporter: | Adam Miller <maxamillion> |
| Component: | Review Request | Assignee: | Vasiliy Glazov <vascom2> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | bz-reply, hobbes1069, leigh123linux, rpmfusion-package-review, sgtbigman, stephendherr, trpost, vascom2 |
| Priority: | P5 | Flags: | vascom2:
fedora-review+
|
| Version: | Current | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | GNU/Linux | ||
| See Also: | http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3833 | ||
| namespace: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 4 | ||
|
Description
Adam Miller
2014-08-12 04:56:21 CEST
I forgot to mention, I've also submitted my patch to the Makefile upstream: https://github.com/PromyLOPh/pianobar/pull/474 Spec: https://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/pianobar.spec SRPM: https://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/pianobar-2014.06.08-2.fc20.src.rpm Removed patch based on upstream feedback. I have built an rpm package for Fedora 21 (using your .spec file), and was wondering if you would need any help supporting pianobar for Fedora 21 on copr. - make can be omitted among BR packages.
- %doc %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}*
Remove %doc macro from this line.
- Use %license macro to package the COPYING file.
- %exclude %{_docdir}/%{name}/INSTALL
This line is unnecessary.
- Are optimization flags respected ?
It looks like some feedback has been given but no one has take up the review formally. Are you still interested in packaging this for RPM Fusion? If the original submitter is not available or has too many other things going on at the moment, I'm open to packaging a Fedora 21 build for RPM Fusion. I just didn't want to step on anyone else's work before doing so, especially since I'm working off of his original spec file. Let's give them a few more days to respond to make sure but I don't have a problem with that. *** Bug 3833 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Nicolas, are you still up for packaging this? Well I'm not Nicolas, but I'm still up for packaging it. SPEC: https://www.dropbox.com/s/kczgg3fm1ajfjob/pianobar.spec?dl=1 SRPM: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jiakm17yrfs5hqt/pianobar-2016.06.02-1.fc24.src.rpm?dl=1 2016.06.02 is still the newest released version: https://6xq.net/pianobar/ Ok, working on what to do here. Your spec file is pretty out of date with the packaging guidelines. I actually package it for myself but that would be awkward to provide that to you and then do the package review. Would it be better for me to post my package and let you review it? We can co-maintain it, not that it's updated frequently. That's fine. I don't care about who packages it, I just think it's a worthwhile thing to have available. SPEC: https://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pianobar.spec SRPM: https://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pianobar-2016.06.02-1.fc25.src.rpm I'm not sure if there's a more formal review process that I'm supposed to be following or something, but this looks good to me. I reviewed the src rpm with the sha256 sum of: 55ee0da9bc5e437717ef1798276415c0675db3e4708e1d9caab4742d9709eb05 SPEC file makes sense, rpmlint is happy, only source is the tarball from the pianobar website, build / install scripts are simple and obvious, description is good, dependencies declared properly. I'd say it's good to be built / shipped. The preference is to use fedora-review which automates a lot of checks but it's broken for RPM Fusion right now. It searches the mock config file for the root name but RPM Fusion mock config files use an include statement to pull in the parent Fedora mock config file and fedora-review doesn't know how to handle that. Are you currently a Fedora packager? Spec has one significant problem: not used fedora flags while linking.
You should use
%prep
%autosetup
touch configure
chmod +x configure
%build
%configure
instead of CFLAGS="%{optflags}";export CFLAGS
(In reply to Richard from comment #15) > Are you currently a Fedora packager? No I'm not. If fedora-review is broken what do you want me to do? Sorry, I assumed you were a packager already. We'll need to find someone else to officially review the package... Vasiliy? I've already included your previous improvements. Anything else before I post new links? You can post new links. I will see it in next few days. SPEC: https://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pianobar.spec SRPM: https://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pianobar-2016.06.02-2.fc25.src.rpm * Wed May 24 2017 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069@gmail.com> - 2016.06.02-2 - Use configure so linker flags are utilized. APPROVED You will need to request branches on the link below https://admin.rpmfusion.org/pkgdb/request/package/ (In reply to Vasiliy Glazov from comment #22) > APPROVED > > You will need to request branches on the link below > > https://admin.rpmfusion.org/pkgdb/request/package/ You also need to set the fedora-review flag to +. It doesn't like me doing it. We have not simple step-by-step insctuction and I am always forget somthing :) Package processed package is still not imported. Is there any reason for that? Please escalate to me if any issue. Sorry, first time for a new package in the new infra. I don't remember seeing an email that it was ready for import. I'll work on that now. Built for Rawhide. F25/26 building now. (In reply to Richard from comment #28) > Built for Rawhide. F25/26 building now. Can you remove the extra (it's lisred twice) BuildRequires: libmad-devel Fixed, but not worth new builds :) |