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 191589
Summary: | Review Request: qt4-qsa: Qt Script for Applications | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Frank Büttner <bugzilla> | ||||
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Rex Dieter <rdieter> | ||||
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> | ||||
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||
Priority: | medium | ||||||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | belegdol | ||||
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | kevin:
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: | 2006-06-28 13:42:51 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 | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Frank Büttner
2006-05-13 11:20:16 UTC
I have a semi-working spec file for the Qt 3 based one (1.1.x). I did not check the Qt4 source package but I expect the build procedure to be the same ( i.e. plain broken :) ) so if you still have not started to write the spec maybe you can benefit from my previous work. Do you need/want me to submit a formal review request? I have start written the qsa spec file for Qt4. But this is very difficult at this time without seen the final one for Qt4. So I write it so, that it all way's work. But one feature of qsa must be disabled. When you have an working spec file for qsa then you can post it here and do the job. And I close this review. I think to modify it for Qt4 is not very hard when you disable the editor feature then you can use your spec file for QSA 1.2.1 with Qt 4.1.2. compiling works with configure -release -no-editor -prefix ... FYI, qt4 review is bug 188180 I'd say base your qsa work off that, for now, at least. As for qsa/qt3, qsa/qt4, I'd recommend submitting each as a separate review request (unless it's more convenient to build package both from a single specfile). Once a spec/srpm is mentioned here, I can start a review. Ok I do the work for qsa/Qt4 and Gianluca Sforna can do this for qsa/Qt3. I have found possible a solution for the qt3support part problem. So the first version of the spec file is ready. http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa.spec?download As far the Qt4 package is ready I can remove the hard coded Qt path and the rest of the work. There's no need to hard-code the qt path, at least not in the qt4 case, since it uses pkg-config. Use this instead to define qtdir: BuildRequires: qt4-devel %global qtdir %(pkg-config --variable=prefix QtCore) and %files should probably be like: %files ... %qtdir/lib/libqsa.so.* %files devel ... %qtdir/lib/libqsa.so qsa-devel certainly will need Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} Requires: qt4-devel Well, are there any particular reasons qt3 package cannot make its way into fc5 extras? At least two programs would benefit from it (LabPlot and museek). Greets. Yes. For Qt3 you will need another version of QSA. So this BR is for qt4 qsa. Will have to wait till fc6 then. You can build an package for QSA on Qt3 when you will. But you must call it then qsa3 or something like. So after the new version of the Qt package is out here the first public version of the package. http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa-1.2.1-3FC4.src.rpm?download so the next version is ready for review. here the URL: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa-1.2.1-4FC4.src.rpm?download Changelog: - enable qt3support - Prevent for compiling using Qt >=4.2 witch will need another version of QSA. - add missing .h files NEEDSWORK: * qsa.spec (and probably) qsa's configure script assumes QTLIB=%qtdir/lib QTINC=%qtdir/include which isn't necessarily true. In particular, on x86_64, QTLIB=%qtdir/lib64. Further, future iterations of qt4 may move QTLIB=%_libdir and/or QTINC=%_includedir. specfile patch forthcoming. Created attachment 130748 [details]
fix QTLIB,QTINC
fix QTLIB,QTINC
use install -p
only libqsa.so -> -devel, others in main pkg
NEEDSWORK * Source's should be full URL: Source: ftp://ftp.trolltech.com/qsa/source/qsa-x11-opensource-%{version}.tar.gz Thanks but I have found an Bug in the Qt packae the variable for the include path of the QtTest is wrong it show to %{prefix}/include but it must show %{prefix}/include/QtTest. So the line qtinc %(pkg-config QtTest --variable=includedir) must be qtinc %(pkg-config QtCore --variable=prefix)/include Thanks. I only chose QtTest because the --includedir output *was* prefix/include. I suppose we could do something not-so-clean-but-still-should-work like: %define qtinc %(pkg-config QtCore --variable=includedir)/.. Here the next version: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa-1.2.1-5FC5.src.rpm?download It'll speed the review process a bit too if you could also post links to the specfile as well. That way, I won't have to redownload the entire source over and over again. %files list is still wrong. In particular, only libqsa.so should be in -devel, easiest template to use is something like: %files %{qtlib}/lib*.so.* %files devel %{qtlib}/lib*.so ok here the URL of the spec file. http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa.spec?download it is every try the same. And URL: ftp://ftp.trolltech.com/qsa/source/qsa-x11-opensource-1.2.1.tar.gz Source: qsa-x11-opensource-%{version}.tar.gz should be: URL: http://www.trolltech.com/products/qt/ Source: ftp://ftp.trolltech.com/qsa/source/qsa-x11-opensource-%{version}.tar.gz the the next please::) http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa-1.2.1-6FC5.src.rpm?download http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa.spec?download Personally, I'd feel more comfortable if you used (something like): %define qtinc %(dirname $(pkg-config QtCore --variable=includedir)) instead of %define qtinc %(pkg-config QtCore --variable=prefix)/include In case we ever do decide to move it out of the qt-prefix (to say, %_includedir). But that's your call as maintainer. Yes this can be useful. So here the new one: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa-1.2.1-7FC5.src.rpm?download http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa.spec?download rpmlint say that the doc part of the devel package are not nice.:( Or can we ignore this? Learned something cool today about qmake, you may want to consider this cleaner/simpler method of determining QTDIR, QTINC, QTLIB: %define qtdir %(qmake4 -query QT_INSTALL_PREFIX) %define qtinc %(qmake4 -query QT_INSTALL_HEADERS) %define qtlib %(qmake4 -query QT_INSTALL_LIBS) re: rpmlint A couple of things: 1. make sure %defattr is *first*, so %files should be: %files %defattr(-,root,root) ... 2. why in -devel %defattr(755,root,root) instead of %defattr(-,root,root)? 3. Re: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding, --hidden-file-or-dir warnings. IMO, these are small-potatoes. You can fix these if you want, but it's not a blocker. Ok now the package with the qmake use.:) http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa-1.2.1-8FC5.src.rpm?download http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/qsmartcard/qsa.spec?download Change %files devel %defattr(0755,root,root) %attr(0644,root,root)%{qtinc}/* ... To %files devel %defattr(0644,root,root) %{qtinc}/* ... And we're *real* close. (unless you have a good reason for doing it your way). I'll recheck all the blocker guidelines tomorrow morning... Looks like the ACCEPT got lost in the bugzilla crash, reclosing. (In reply to comment #29) > Change > %files devel > %defattr(0755,root,root) > %attr(0644,root,root)%{qtinc}/* > ... > > To > %files devel > %defattr(0644,root,root) > %{qtinc}/* > ... Rex, just for the record, it should have been "%defattr(0644,root,root,755)". See bug #214577. I imagine that it was a typo. Heck, I *should* have simply suggested %defattr(-,root,root) Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: qt4-qsa New Branches: F-7 Because the F-7 directory is missing in the CVS repo. found it:) Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: qt4-qsa Remove Branches: devel It can be removed for F-9 and higher, because it have reach it's EOL. And the script function is available since Qt 4.3. So it will be only need until F-8, to get old code working and give the developers some time to adapt her code to Qt 4.3. Please follow the package end of life procedure for the devel branch: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/PackageEndOfLife done. dead.package file add and send the mail to rel-eng |