Hi all
Just modified the gsequencer.spec file. Now, it should be more the fedora way.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/ags/files/fedora/
Additionally, I uploaded the srpm and rpm packages built.
* gsequencer * gsequencer-devel * gsequencer-devel-docs * gsequencer-debuginfo
Bests, Joël
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl wrote:
On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 05:13:24PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:21:21 +0100, Joël Krähemann wrote:
My name is Joël Krähemann. I maintain Advanced Gtk+ Sequencer and I'd like to provide it in fedora. Linux is my OS of choice since 2001. Along the time I have used many distributions like debian, linux from scratch, SUSE, fedora and a few others.
Hello!
Here find some helpful links about the Fedora Packager and their processes:
In particular, you should open a Review request for gsequencer as the next step.
From a quick view at the spec file: Source0 should be a full URL
'-n gsequencer' is a noop, just drop it for readability. Similarly, %setup -q -n %{name}-%{version} → %setup -q or oven just %autosetup.
In %files: %{_libdir}/gsequencer/* → %{_libdir}/gsequencer (you need to "own" the directory too). Similarly in %{_datadir}, if you run rpmlint I'm pretty sure it'll complain about unowned directories.
In general, it's better to put each Requires/BuildRequires item on it's own line. Diffs looks better and it's easier to spot mistakes.
No dots at the end of Summary.
Some of the explicit dependencies, e.g. Requires: libags, are most likely uneeded — rpm generates dependencies on libraries automatically.
Also, I'm not sure you need so many subpackages: it's not Debian where every teeny-tiny library needs a separate subpackage. In particular, you can at least merge all the -devel subpackages into one.
But the package looks nice in general. Should not be an issue to get it accepted.
Zbyszek