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

Bug 206877

Summary: Review Request: bzr-gtk - Bazaar plugin for GTK+ interfaces to most Bazaar operations
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Warren Togami <wtogami>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Paul F. Johnson <paul>
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: frank
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-12-28 10:23:45 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 163779    
Description Flags
New spec file none

Description Warren Togami 2006-09-17 16:32:17 UTC
Spec URL: Bazaar plugin for GTK+ interfaces to most Bazaar operations
bzr-gtk is a plugin for Bazaar that aims to provide GTK+ interfaces to most Bazaar operations.

Comment 1 Paul F. Johnson 2006-09-17 16:55:19 UTC
rpmlint stuff...

E: bzr-gtk description-line-too-long
W: mixed use of spaces and tabs (ignore)

Lots of errors due to non-executable-script
(start %{_libdir}/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins/gtk/viz) 0644,
(start %{_libdir}/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins/gtk/) 0644, 0644, 0644, 0644, 0644

Spec file looks okay

building now in mock

Comment 2 Warren Togami 2006-09-17 17:20:11 UTC
E: bzr-gtk non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/bzrlib/plugins/gtk/viz/ 0644

Does this really need to be executable?
And how rpmlint seeing this as different from the many other py files that it
isn't complaining about?

Comment 4 Paul F. Johnson 2006-09-17 20:03:04 UTC
Created attachment 136493 [details]
New spec file

This spec file addresses every warning and error rpmlint was throwing up on my
buildsys. It builds cleanly in mock.

Comment 5 Warren Togami 2006-09-18 01:40:51 UTC
Making the permissions on those scripts 755 seems to be not needed at all.  Most
of similar installed files have 644 permissions, and this software works fine. 
These scripts are not meant to be run directly.

Do we really need to do this?

Comment 6 Frank Arnold 2006-09-18 02:46:42 UTC
Just remove the shebang (#!/usr/bin/python) from to get rid of this
rpmlint error. Maybe you can convince upstream to do the same, if it's really
not needed.

Comment 7 Warren Togami 2006-09-18 16:07:47 UTC
Requesting approval of the package in #3 which fixes the .src.rpm rpmlint
warnings.  The opinion of fedora-extras-list is the permission issues are not a
problem at all.  Removal of shebang is not required either.

Comment 8 Paul F. Johnson 2006-09-18 20:14:08 UTC


Spec file in US-English
Consistent use of macros
Contains docs
upstream and package md5sums match
the software installs and deinstalls cleanly
no dupes in the rpms
contains a %clean section
builds cleanly in mock
rpmlint gives plenty of warnings and errors, but they can be ignored
follows python packaging guidelines


Comment 9 Paul F. Johnson 2006-11-02 22:15:18 UTC
Could you please close this bug if it has been imported?