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 208422
Summary: | Review Request: wmctrl - A command line tool to interact with an EWMH/NetWM compatible X Window Manager. | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Michael Rice <michael> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Patrice Dumas <pertusus> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | bugs.michael, pertusus |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-10-07 05:51:10 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
Michael Rice
2006-09-28 14:36:58 UTC
Is it your first package? In that case you should block the FE-NEEDSPONSOR bug. Some quick comments: You should wrap your lines at 80 columns for %description The summary is too long and should not end with a dot. Since I think that most if not all the window managers in fedora are EWMH/NetWM compatible (except maybe mwm and twm...) I think it is not very usefull to specify that in the summary. -n %{name}-%{version} is not usefull on the %setup line since it is the default. Application/Control don't seem to exist. The groups are at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RPMGroups I think that Group: User Interface/X could be right. libXmu-devel allready requires libX11-devel This is my second package, and I am seeking a sponsor Your bug should also block FE-NEW... I readd it. Patrice, thanks for looking this over, pardon me if I get some things wrong with this bugzilla, I have never used this before. FE-NEW Im not sure what you mean by this.. I redid the spec file and built a new srpm it is here: http://errr.fluxbox-wiki.org/fedora_stuff/wmctrl-1.07-2.fc5.src.rpm And the spec is here: http://errr.fluxbox-wiki.org/fedora_stuff/wmctrl-1.07-2.fc5/wmctrl.spec I didn't asked to have a shorter description but a shorter summary... For the %description I just asked to have it wrapped at 80 columns. You have to keep the dot at the end of the description. Some comments for conky are relevant here (NEWS empty, bad changelog entries). Ok I have fixed all the warnings and errors from rpmlint, the changelog entries are now well formatted and detailed. http://errr.fluxbox-wiki.org/fedora_stuff/wmctrl/2/wmctrl-1.07-2.fc5.src.rpm http://errr.fluxbox-wiki.org/fedora_stuff/wmctrl/2/wmctrl.spec Any other suggestions on this package? It seems approvable for me. I have a comment, though which isn't a blocker. You used wildcards in %files, it is fine and sometimes unavoidable, but I myself prefer listing a bit more explicitely, to notice when something change in the package. It is a matter of personal preferences, but I would have chosed, in your case, something along: %{_bindir}/wmctrl %{_mandir}/man1/wmctrl.1* Now you have to find a sponsor. This package is a bit simple but you shown you were able to follow the guidelines. I am ready to sponsor you if conky is accepted, but since it is a much more complicated package, I'll also sponsor you if you do usefull comments on other reviews. That's the first time I am in a position to sponsor somebody so I hope I'll be good sponsor ;-) Another remark, the timestamp of the sources is bad. To have the right timestmap, you can use wget -N on the url, or spectool -g on the specfile. It is better to have the right timestamps, it gives some usefull information. Patrice, why don't you just sponsor him? Umm, duh, please just ignore me. Wow this is great, thanks. I will look into this timestamp issue. As for conky I am some what stuck on it right now because I can get it to build and run fine if I build it from ~/ but if I build with mock it keeps dumping a core when its started... Im not sure how to trouble shoot it further than what I have it now. (In reply to comment #12) > Wow this is great, thanks. I will look into this timestamp issue. As for conky I > am some what stuck on it right now because I can get it to build and run fine if > I build it from ~/ but if I build with mock it keeps dumping a core when its > started... Im not sure how to trouble shoot it further than what I have it now. Try using rpmdiff (from the rpmlint package) to see what the difference is between your locally-built package and one built in mock. That might give you a pointer. * rpmlint is silent * follow packaging/naming guidelines * spec legible * match upstream 1fe3c7a2caa6071e071ba34f587e1555 wmctrl-1.07.tar.gz * sane provides * right buildrequires * free software, licence included I'll sponsor you. APPROVED |