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 219119
Summary: | Review Request: pyscript - Postscript graphics with Python | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jef Spaleta <jspaleta> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Michał Bentkowski <mr.ecik> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | paul, peter |
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: | 2006-12-13 04:20:06 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
Jef Spaleta
2006-12-11 05:49:29 UTC
*** Bug 191218 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Eh, sorry Jef. The hosting is HTTP-only for anonymous/public access. Spec: http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/pyscript/pyscript.spec SRPM: http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/pyscript/pyscript-0.6-5.fc6.src.rpm Thanks for your understanding; and apologies for the slight inconvenience. opps, I just cut and pasted the url through nautilus this time. I didn't think about the ftp/http issue oh well. For everyone playing along, the urls in Comment #2 are correct for public access. -jef I'll do the review soon... MUST items: !* rpmlint output: W: pyscript macro-in-%changelog python_sitelib W: pyscript macro-in-%changelog ghost W: pyscript macro-in-%changelog __python W: pyscript macro-in-%changelog _libdir E: pyscript no-binary E: pyscript-debuginfo empty-debuginfo-package * package is named well * spec file name is good * package meets Packaging Guidelines * package is licensed with a GPL open-source compatible license * License field in spec file matches actual license * license file is included in %doc * md5sums are matching (8b4945fda4318abdcd77f1573996b9da) * package successfully compiles on x86_64 * BuildRequires listed well * no locales * no need to %post and %postun sections * not relocatable * package owns directories well * no duplicates in %files * %files section includes %defattr * proper %clean section * macros used well THINGS to do: * get rid of all macro-in-%changelog rpmlint warnings by doubling all % characters in %changelog. For example: instead of %{_libdir} write %%{_libdir} * fix no-binary and debuginfo package problems by adding BuildArch: noarch to preamble * from my experience I know that using python-devel BR instead of python is better solution * do we really need tetex package? I have grepped all the sources and I found that pyscript needs only latex application which is part of tetex-latex package. Thus I believe that it is a dependency we really need. Correct me if I am wrong. Okay I think the new srpm and spec cover everything in the TODO. rpmlint retunrs clean for me now. I read over the py files and it is calling latex and dvips which are both in the tetex-latex package, not tetex. http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/pyscript/pyscript.spec http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/pyscript/pyscript-0.6-6.fc7.src.rpm http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/pyscript/pyscript-0.6-6.fc7.noarch.rpm rpmlint is silent now, so nothing stands in the way to make this package accepted. APPROVED. Don't forget to close this ticket after rebuilding package in devel. |