https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #2 from Jørn Lomax <northlomax(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Spec URL: http://jvlomax.fedorapeople.org/jam-control.specg SRPM URL: http://jvlomax.fedorapeople.org/jam-control-1.0-2.fc17.src.rpm rpmlint runs clean (1 "spelling error") -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 Brendan Jones <brendan.jones.it(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |brendan.jones.it(a)gmail.com Blocks| |805236 (FedoraAudio) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #5 from Brendan Jones <brendan.jones.it(a)gmail.com&gt; --- PS: always I good idea to bump the tarball minor/bug relase when you make changes within I had to remove the --vendor tag in the dektop file install to get it named properly. There's a a few desktop-file-install warnings you should address as well There's a different module path in /usr/bin/jam-control (/usr/share/fedora-audio-control) that needs amending -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #7 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to comment #6) But if this check fails, the app doesn't start...? No good idea actually. If it doesn't run without those deps, it is buggy. Please add all it needs to "Requires", unless it is optional. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #9 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Doesn't make sense. An application shouldn't require some interactive post-install action to make it usable. Well, there's a way to let users choose from either the one or the other requirement, but this is when a needed unique requirement is provided by two or more packages. A typical case are "clean" packages from Fedora itself and somewhat "dirty" packages from RPMfusion. But there's no way known to me to users let choose from more than one dependency (correct me if I'm wrong). An alternative way to get satisfy users is the app itself. Maybe you could add an "first time assistant" which enforces the user (who is also sysadmin in many cases) to install one of the needed sound servers. Sorry, I haven't tested your application, perhaps you have it already implemented. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #11 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to comment #10) "Requires" is for adding requirements which are needed at runtime. Please add there all what is really required and don't assume that is anything present anyway. Assuming something for a common system is the contrary of clean and proper packaging. A sound server gui without to force at least one sound server to have installed doesn't make sense. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.co | |m Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #13 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Taking this for a full review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #15 from Ian Malone <ibmalone(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Python dependencies: I ran into some issues over this. The rpm was being built with these dependencies: rpm -qRp ~/build/RPMS/jam-control-1.01-2.fc18.noarch.rpm /bin/python /bin/sh /bin/sh /bin/sh PyQt4 hicolor-icon-theme pulseaudio rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets) <= 4.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 - this was okay if installing directly, but when trying to build a livecd /bin/python wasn't being identified correctly and getting me this error: Error creating Live CD : Failed to build transaction : jam-control-1.01-2.fc18.noarch requires /bin/python (yes, whatprovides was finding it okay, maybe the real bug here is somewhere else) The /bin/python dependency is actually picked up straight from the shebangs at the top of the scripts by rpmbuild. I've actually just managed to work around it by sed-ing them back to /usr/bin/python. Not sure what the correct fix should be (and it could probably be done at either the spec or source level). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #17 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; --- There are still one issue to be fixed: (In reply to comment #14) Regarding the problem mentioned in comment #15: #!/bin/python Such hardcoded paths don't make sense. Better: #!/usr/bin/env python or even #!/usr/bin/env python2 (which is eventually not usable for all distributions) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #19 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Still a small issue: * Sun Oct 14 2012 Jørn Lomax <northlomax(a)gmail.com&gt; 1.01-3 Besides that you have the wrong upstream version in the changelog: You have to bump the release tag each time you change something, but this refers only to a certain upstream version. Once the version number has changed, you have to set the release tag back to 1. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #21 from Brendan Jones <brendan.jones.it(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Hey Jorn, just a couple of warnings in your desktop file install: + desktop-file-install --dir /home/bsjones/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/jam-control-1.02-1.fc18.x86_64/usr/share/applications dist/jam-control.desktop /home/bsjones/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/jam-control-1.02-1.fc18.x86_64/usr/share/applications/jam-control.desktop: error: (will be fatal in the future): value "application-default-icon.png" for key "Icon" in group "Desktop Entry" is an icon name with an extension, but there should be no extension as described in the Icon Theme Specification if the value is not an absolute path /home/bsjones/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/jam-control-1.02-1.fc18.x86_64/usr/share/applications/jam-control.desktop: error: (will be fatal in the future): value "Audio" in key "Categories" in group "Desktop Entry" requires another category to be present among the following categories: AudioVideo I'd add X-Jack;X-AudioVideoTools; to the categories. It will add it to the Jack and Tools submenus of the multimedia menus -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.co | |m Flags| |fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #23 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4633650 $ rpmlint -i -v * jam-control.src: I: checking jam-control.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pulseaudio -> pulse audio, pulse-audio, audiovisuals The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. jam-control.src: I: checking-url https://gitorious.org/jam-control (timeout 10 seconds) jam-control.src: I: checking-url http://jvlomax.fedorapeople.org/jam-control/jam-control-1.03.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) jam-control.noarch: I: checking jam-control.noarch: I: checking-url https://gitorious.org/jam-control (timeout 10 seconds) jam-control.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jam-control Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. jam-control.spec: I: checking-url http://jvlomax.fedorapeople.org/jam-control/jam-control-1.03.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. No recognizable issues. --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review. [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. GPLv3+ [+] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. $ sha256sum * 585c68c2e8321dc662b12320bc48a1d949f24008f163fca567081284dedc1711 jam-control-1.03.tar.gz 585c68c2e8321dc662b12320bc48a1d949f24008f163fca567081284dedc1711 jam-control-1.03.tar.gz.orig [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden. [.] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations) [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. [+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [.] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See Koji build above (which uses Mock anyway). [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [.] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [.] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense. ---------------- PACKAGE APPROVED ---------------- -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849026 --- Comment #25 from Jon Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.