https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1211831
--- Comment #41 from Gerald Cox <gbcox(a)bzb.us> ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #40)
Gerald, you can follow Michael's advice of course.
Antonio, if you know of another method to resolve the duplicate file issue,
please let me know. I am always open to new ideas and techniques. The only
way I know to get rid of the warnings in a straight forward and easy to
understand way is by using %dir.
- INSTALL is not required for packaging
OK, I've removed it from %doc
- Have you looked why some tests fail ?
The tests all run fine for me.
http://goo.gl/dHoKlS
Remember, these tests are not intended for packaging, and
require quite a bit of time to run - depending on your
machine up to 15 minutes. I did have a conversation with the
developer because I was a bit concerned that turning them on may impact
normal performance. That doesn't appear to be the case, however depending
on when and how they are used could cause some confusion to the end user.
The developer is going to add some additional information to the test
instructions to clarify when and how they should be used.
If you execute "copyq tests", not all finish
successfully.
Try running them from your desktop environment after you have installed
the package. You should see them running, it is a bit entertaining to
watch. Get a cup of coffee though, it takes some time.
You can run all tests (or specific tests) by
%check
xvfb-run -a ./copyq tests
in the RPM packaging
The tests won't work in packaging since they are designed to be run from the
desktop environment.
- copyq does not work for me.
That is strange, I have run it on two separate
machines with no problem.
This probably would be an instance where you would want to run the tests
(from your desktop environment) and report the results.
Try to strace it, a lot of icons are not found.
Yes, I am aware of the icon issue and am working with the developer to correct.
See comment #30. That should not be affecting the functionality of the program.
Issues:
=======
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/copyq/locale/copyq_af.qm
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles
I will correct this using the %dir - but if you know of a better way, let
me know.
- If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
Note: Cannot find LICENSE in rpm(s)
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
This is a false positive, as you pointed out in comment #27.
As always, thanks again for your help. It is much appreciated.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component