Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 189088
Summary: | Review Request: knemo Network monitor applet. | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Richard June <rjune> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Aurelien Bompard <gauret> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | antillon.maurizio, francois.aucamp, hugo, rdieter |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | wtogami:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-05-30 12:12:12 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Richard June
2006-04-15 21:32:57 UTC
*** Bug 192524 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Needs work: * No downloadable source. Please give the full URL in the Source tag. * Desktop file: vendor should be fedora (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#desktop) * Desktop file: the Categories tag should contain Application and X-Fedora (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#desktop) * The translation files are not properly tagged, use the %find_lang macro (wiki: Packaging/ReviewGuidelines) * Scriptlets: missing "gtk-update-icon-cache" in %post and %postun (wiki: ScriptletSnippets) * Don't rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %prep, it breaks rpm -qi --short-circuit * The "-n %{name}-%{version}" part in %setup is useless, it's already the default * export QTDIR=/usr/lib/qt-3.3/ should be replaced by: unset QTDIR && . %{_sysconfdir}/profile.d/qt.sh export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include and it should be moved at the top of %build * %configure should be moved in %build * The BuildRoot must be cleaned at the beginning of %install * Use make install, not make install-strip. RPM will strip the binaries by itself * INSTALL is useless as a %doc, we're using RPM. * %{_datadir}/*/*/*/* is a too generic, use %{_datadir}/icons/*/*/*/*.png * The directory /usr/share/apps/knemo/ should be owned by the package (In reply to comment #2) > Needs work: > * The directory /usr/share/apps/knemo/ should be owned by the package > And it should be /usr/share/knemo/ not /usr/share/apps/knemo/ Per default, KDE applications use the /usr/share/apps instead of /usr/share. Ugly :) But it seems you'r correct, sorry mybad. Oh my god, I shouldn't have done this, but... SPEC: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/SPECS/knemo.spec SRPM: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/5/SRPMS/knemo-0.4.0-2.src.rpm (In reply to comment #6) > Oh my god, I shouldn't have done this, but... > Indeed you shouldn't. As said I think its great you want to create more packages for Fedora. I also understand that you've put time and energy into sparse and thus don't want to just walk away just because somebodyelse is also working on it*. But you can't just hijack thihs package let alone this review request. Please try to contact Richard June (rjune) and work together with him on this. You could do a comaintainer ship: Merge your 2 specfiles using the best parts of both. Then one of you imports it into cvs and becomes the owner as specified in owners.list, the others bugzilla email gets put in the initial-CC field of owners.list, so that he gets all bugzilla mail related to the package 2, then you can coordinate bugfixes for Bz bugs through BZ and other bugfixes / new releases through private mail. * been there done that myself, search the f-e-l mailing list archives on monkey-bubble (In reply to comment #7) > > Oh my god, I shouldn't have done this, but... > > Indeed you shouldn't. As said I think its great you want to create more packages > for Fedora. I also understand that you've put time and energy into sparse and > thus don't want to just walk away just because somebodyelse is also working on > it*. But you can't just hijack thihs package let alone this review request. I'm not trying to overtake the package. Like I said in the other bug, I made a mistake and recognized that. But as I am exercising my package work, I made my last available SPECS and SRPMS for the maintainer (Richard June) to use it (I already did it before Aurelien duplicated my bug). Since my spec conforms with many things noted by the reviewer, he can use it freely to learn and get this package available in Extras on short-time. > Please try to contact Richard June (rjune) and work together > with him on this. I sent an e-mail to him early talking about this, asking him if he still wants to maintain the package, and pointing my work so that if he wants to maintain, he can use a more-correct specfile ;) > You could do a comaintainer ship: Merge your 2 specfiles using the best parts of > both. Then one of you imports it into cvs and becomes the owner as specified in > owners.list, the others bugzilla email gets put in the initial-CC field of > owners.list, so that he gets all bugzilla mail related to the package 2, then > you can coordinate bugfixes for Bz bugs through BZ and other bugfixes / new > releases through private mail. It is a great idea, but if he wants to maintain the package and use my specfile, he can do it and I will not want any credits for it :P Just think of it as a replacement for my mistake (not looking in FE-NEW bug). I'll wait an answer from him, and one more time: I am very sorry about this issue! This won't happen again. Hugo, just to make it clear: I understand your motives and it's nice of you to help Richard with this package. Except, you're giving him a fish, instead of teaching him how to fish. About the *.la files, the ones directly in /usr/lib/*.la are safe to remove, but the others are often needed by KDE. Hi guys, I received an e-mail by Richard June regarding this issue: Message was signed with unknown key 0x0B7A5FDA3258B581. The validity of the signature cannot be verified. Status: No public key to verify the signature Actually, I'm not particularly interested in maintaining knemo. I would happily concede maintainership to you -- Chuck Norris is a hack. MacGyver could build a gun from a paperclip and shoot Chuck Norris, then build a Stargate from a toaster and hide the body on some planet with no food whatsoever for when Chuck Norris wakes up. Public Key available Here: http://www.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/pubkey.asc Did I make your life better? http://home.bravegnuworld.com/~rjune/appreciation.html End of signed message If you need other information I can forward the e-mail or ask him to send an e-mail or post here (I don't think it's necessary, but...). Now I can use my specfile for this review, I would be glad if someone can review it to include quality software as soon as possible in Extras :) Thanks! Needs work: * Desktop files installed in %{_datadir}/applications/kde don't need the "--vendor fedora" namespace, they already have kde (they are in the kde subdir). * As a consequence, you don't need to rename them afterwards. Notes: * Why drop the keywords from the desktop file ? (really) Minor: * The Patch0 line and the "--add-category X-KDE-settings-network" are not properly lined-up (tab instead of spaces) Package updated: Spec URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/SPECS/knemo.spec SRPM URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/5/SRPMS/knemo-0.4.0-3.src.rpm Changes: - Removed vendor option from deskto-file-install (no renaming) Notes: > * Why drop the keywords from the desktop file ? rpmbuild and desktop-file-install were complaining like hell about these keywords, so I got it out :) Review for release 3: * RPM name is OK * Source knemo-0.4.0.tar.bz2 is the same as upstream * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint looks OK * File list looks OK * Works fine APPROVED A couple of suggestions: 1) Since configure includes: checking for ifconfig... /sbin/ifconfig checking for iwconfig... /sbin/iwconfig You'd best add: # /sbin/iwconfig BuildRequires: wireless-tools # /sbin/ifconfig BuildRequires: net-tools 2. per the README: IMPORTANT: KNemo is not an executable but an KDED service. Therefore it has to be started using Control Center/KDE Components/Service Manager. As such, this pkg probably ought to Requires: kdebase 3. .desktop files The categories are already properly set, the only one you should add is --add-category=X-Fedora (else it might accidentally show up in Gnome's menus somewhere). 4. unowned %{_datadir}/apps/knemo, in %files, change %{_datadir}/apps/knemo/eventsrc to %{_datadir}/apps/knemo (In reply to comment #14) > You'd best add: > # /sbin/iwconfig > BuildRequires: wireless-tools > # /sbin/ifconfig > BuildRequires: net-tools Agreed, the detection is done at compile time, not run time. Thus if you don't have them during the build, you won't be able to use them afterwards, even if knemo only calls them and parses the output. > As such, this pkg probably ought to > Requires: kdebase > The categories are already properly set, the only one you should add is > --add-category=X-Fedora Agreed. > 4. unowned %{_datadir}/apps/knemo I can't believe I missed that... Thanks Rex. Thanks Rex! I followed the tips in your review and created a new release. It is now imported and built. Closing. Thanks Aurelien and all. As I realized this too late, I imported and built (with Comment #14 changes) before getting into FE-ACCEPT again (as in Comment #13). I hope a final review returns good :-) And sorry for my little mistake. Package updated: Spec URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/SPECS/knemo.spec SRPM URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/5/SRPMS/knemo-0.4.0-4.src.rpm Changes: - Created BuildRequires for the ifconfig and iwconfig commands, as knemo utilizes it for monitoring. - Removed addition of categories in desktop-file-install command The changes are OK, APPROVED. Ok, as I am not the original reporter of this bug, who can close it with resolution NEXTRELEASE? I can't. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: knemo Updated Fedora Owners: faucamp.za Hugo Cisneiros (the previous maintainer of this package) is AWOL. As per this discussion on the f-e-l, I will be maintaining this package from now on: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2007-March/msg00025.html An email was also sent by Hans de Goede (j. w. r. degoede <at> hhs (dot) nl) to cvsadmins on 2007-03-02 with the final list of Hugo's packages' new owners; I can forward this if necessary. Please change owners.list and the ACLs to reflect this change? Thanks! |