Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: gsimplecal - Simple GTK calendar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637352
Summary: Review Request: gsimplecal - Simple GTK calendar Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: gracca@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
SPEC: http://skytux.fedorapeople.org/packages/gsimplecal.spec
SRPM: http://skytux.fedorapeople.org/packages/gsimplecal-0.5-1.fc13.src.rpm
Description:
Gsimplecal is a lightweight calendar applet written in C++ using GTK2. ________________________________________________________________________________
rpmlint output:
Checking RPM package (gsimplecal-0.5-1.fc13.i686.rpm) -------------------- gsimplecal.i686: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/gsimplecal.1.gz 30: warning: `ny' not defined 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Checking DEBUG package (gsimplecal-debuginfo-0.5-1.fc13.i686.rpm) ---------------------- 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Checking SPEC file (gsimplecal.spec) ------------------ gsimplecal.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install gsimplecal.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://gsimplecal.googlecode.com/files/gsimplecal-0.5.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Checking SRPM package (gsimplecal-0.5-1.fc13.src.rpm) --------------------- gsimplecal.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install gsimplecal.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://gsimplecal.googlecode.com/files/gsimplecal-0.5.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. ________________________________________________________________________________
koji builds from scratch:
F-12: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2488133 F-13: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2488198 F-14: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2488336 F-15: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2488341
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=637352
Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fabian@bernewireless.net
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net 2010-10-26 07:47:55 EDT --- You need to fix the rpmlint warnings. To test an URL, you can use 'spectool' and add a 'rm -rf %{buildroot}' to the install section. The issue with the man page probably needs a patch
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=637352
--- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fabian@bernewireless.net 2010-10-26 07:48:52 EDT --- P.S. The latest release is 0.6
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=637352
--- Comment #3 from Germán Racca gracca@gmail.com 2010-10-26 16:05:41 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2)
P.S. The latest release is 0.6
Hello Fabian:
Many thanks for your suggestions. I've updated my package to new version, and also I've patched the man page. I've googled and I discovered that you can disable/enable hyphenation in this way:
.nh some text here .hy
so there was a typo in the man page, where the author used .ny instead of .hy, but now it is corrected. In general, in my spec files I don't use the cleaning of the buildroot (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag). With respect to the use of spectool to test an URL, I don't know how to use it, but I assure you it is a valid URL.
* New files are here:
SPEC: http://skytux.fedorapeople.org/packages/gsimplecal.spec SRPM: http://skytux.fedorapeople.org/packages/gsimplecal-0.6-1.fc13.src.rpm
* rpmlint output:
Checking RPM package (gsimplecal-0.6-1.fc13.i686.rpm) -------------------- 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Checking DEBUG package (gsimplecal-debuginfo-0.6-1.fc13.i686.rpm) ---------------------- 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Checking SPEC file (gsimplecal.spec) ------------------ gsimplecal.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install gsimplecal.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://gsimplecal.googlecode.com/files/gsimplecal-0.6.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Checking SRPM package (gsimplecal-0.6-1.fc13.src.rpm) --------------------- gsimplecal.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install gsimplecal.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://gsimplecal.googlecode.com/files/gsimplecal-0.6.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 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=637352
Guido Trentalancia guido@trentalancia.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |guido@trentalancia.com
--- Comment #4 from Guido Trentalancia guido@trentalancia.com 2011-01-04 16:47:12 EST --- You should clean %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install (add "rm -rf %{buildroot}" as the first line of %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=637352
--- Comment #5 from Guido Trentalancia guido@trentalancia.com 2011-01-04 17:03:11 EST --- Unfortunately it looks exactly the same as the clock-applet from gnome-panel. So what's the point of having this ?
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=637352
--- Comment #6 from Guido Trentalancia guido@trentalancia.com 2011-01-04 17:28:38 EST --- Also, from the Packaging Guidelines:
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.
Which does not seem the case for this package.
I also encountered a problem building with upstream g++ using -march=i386, although i386 is probably obsolete nowadays (the issue was about undefined references to `__sync_fetch_and_add_4', which is a somewhat known issue, don't know about g++ shipped with Fedora).
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=637352
--- Comment #7 from Germán Racca gracca@gmail.com 2011-01-09 03:56:59 EST --- (In reply to comment #4)
You should clean %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install (add "rm -rf %{buildroot}" as the first line of %install).
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=637352
--- Comment #8 from Germán Racca gracca@gmail.com 2011-01-09 04:00:14 EST --- (In reply to comment #5)
Unfortunately it looks exactly the same as the clock-applet from gnome-panel. So what's the point of having this ?
From the site of gsimplecal:
"It was intentionally made for use with tint2 panel in the openbox environment to be launched upon clock click..."
Also, it doesn't depends on gnome-panel!
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=637352
--- Comment #9 from Germán Racca gracca@gmail.com 2011-01-09 04:12:41 EST --- (In reply to comment #6)
Also, from the Packaging Guidelines:
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.
Which does not seem the case for this package.
I also encountered a problem building with upstream g++ using -march=i386, although i386 is probably obsolete nowadays (the issue was about undefined references to `__sync_fetch_and_add_4', which is a somewhat known issue, don't know about g++ shipped with Fedora).
Please, are you interested in doing a complete review? If so, I will follow your suggestions :)
Regards, German.
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=637352
--- Comment #10 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2011-01-09 08:09:31 EST --- (In reply to comment #4)
You should clean %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install (add "rm -rf %{buildroot}" as the first line of %install).
I just wanted to point out that this information is not correct. The BuildRoot: tag, cleaning of %buildroot at the beginning of %install and the entire %clean section are not needed for any Fedora release or for EL6. If the package is intended for EL4 or EL5 then those are required.
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=637352
--- Comment #11 from Germán Racca gracca@gmail.com 2011-01-10 08:59:28 EST --- (In reply to comment #10)
(In reply to comment #4)
You should clean %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install (add "rm -rf %{buildroot}" as the first line of %install).
I just wanted to point out that this information is not correct. The BuildRoot: tag, cleaning of %buildroot at the beginning of %install and the entire %clean section are not needed for any Fedora release or for EL6. If the package is intended for EL4 or EL5 then those are required.
Thanks Jason, I know about it, but as I already defined BuildRoot tag in the spec file, so I added the other lines.
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=637352
Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mariobl@freenet.de
--- Comment #12 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-10-03 16:03:46 EDT --- Upstream development has moved to Github:
https://github.com/dmedvinsky/gsimplecal
Latest release is 1.1 (September 19, 2011):
https://github.com/downloads/dmedvinsky/gsimplecal/gsimplecal-1.1.tar.gz
By the way, it doesn't need gnome-panel or any other panel. It is actually a kind of pop-up widget rather than a panel applet. From the homepage:
"It was intentionally made for use with tint2 panel in the openbox environment to be launched upon clock click, but of course it will work without it. In fact, binding the gsimplecal to some hotkey in your window manager will probably make you happy. The thing is that when it is started it first shows up, when you run it again it closes the running instance. In that way it is very easy to integrate anywhere. No need to write some wrapper scripts or whatever."
@German, if you are still interested in to package and maintain it, I would do the 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=637352
--- Comment #13 from Mario Blättermann mariobl@freenet.de 2011-10-30 10:53:49 EDT --- Any news about this?
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=637352
--- Comment #14 from Germán Racca gracca@gmail.com 2012-01-20 16:16:11 EST --- I'm very sorry Mario, but I'm not more interested in this package.
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=637352
Mario Blättermann mario.blaettermann@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG Last Closed| |2012-01-20 16:59:24
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org