Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: xosd - On-screen display library for X
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Summary: Review Request: xosd - On-screen display library for X Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ppisar@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: ---
Spec URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/xosd/xosd.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/xosd/xosd-2.2.14-15.fc17.src.rpm Description: XOSD displays text on your screen, sounds simple right? The difference is it is unmanaged and shaped, so it appears transparent. This gives the effect of an On Screen Display, like your TV/VCR etc.
This is re-review of xosd because I want to unretire it.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Petr Šabata psabata@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |psabata@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |psabata@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
--- Comment #1 from Petr Šabata psabata@redhat.com 2012-01-12 10:13:03 EST --- Package Review ==============
Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated
==== C/C++ ==== [x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [!]: MUST ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. Note: /sbin/ldconfig not called in %post [x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: MUST Package contains no static executables. [x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: MUST Package is not relocatable. [x]: MUST Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
==== Generic ==== [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5 [-]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [-]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5 [x]: MUST 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. [x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: MUST License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [!]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict. [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [?]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. <snip> xosd.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/xosd-2.2.14/COPYING xosd-devel.i686: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/xosd-config.1.gz 14: warning: macro `l' not defined </snip> [x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. /home/contyk/src/review/756780/xosd_2.2.14.orig.tar.gz : MD5SUM this package : 4b349fe930e4eee2f504d6c02673e24d MD5SUM upstream package : 4b349fe930e4eee2f504d6c02673e24d
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [?]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [-]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
Issues: NOTE: There are no reason for the used patches. What's their purpose? (Patch1 esp.) TODO: Usual FSF address in license issue; poke upstream. NOTE: See what you could do about the manpage macro warning. (not a blocker) TODO: Use a fully versioned, arch specific base package Requires in the devel subpackage, i.e. Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
Generated by fedora-review 0.1.1 External plugins:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com 2012-01-13 05:27:21 EST --- Updated package is on the same location. I changed URL and Source to reflect new upstream home.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Petr Šabata psabata@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Petr Šabata psabata@redhat.com 2012-01-13 05:35:47 EST --- --- a/xosd.spec +++ b/xosd.spec @@ -4,10 +4,9 @@ Release: 15%{?dist} Summary: On-screen display library for X Group: System Environment/Libraries License: GPLv2+ -URL: http://www.ignavus.net/software.html -Source: http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/x/xosd/%%7Bname%7D_%%7Bversion%7D.ori.... +URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libxosd/ +Source: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/libxosd/%%7Bname%7D-%%7Bversion%7D.tar.gz Patch0: %{name}-aclocal18.patch -Patch1: %{name}-defaults.patch BuildRequires: libX11-devel BuildRequires: libXext-devel BuildRequires: libXinerama-devel @@ -25,7 +24,7 @@ the effect of an On Screen Display, like your TV/VCR etc. %package devel Summary: Development files for the XOSD on-screen display library Group: Development/Libraries -Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} +Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} Requires: libX11-devel Requires: libXext-devel Requires: libXinerama-devel @@ -37,7 +36,6 @@ on-screen display. %prep %setup -q %patch0 -p0 -%patch1 -p1 for f in ChangeLog man/xosd_{create,destroy,display,is_onscreen,set_bar_length}.3 ; do iconv -f iso-8859-1 -t utf-8 "$f" > "${f}.utf8" touch -r "$f" "${f}.utf8" @@ -82,11 +80,13 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/%{name} %{_mandir}/man3/xosd*.3*
%changelog -* Thu Nov 24 2011 Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com - 2.2.14-15 +* Fri Jan 13 2012 Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com - 2.2.14-15 - Disable XMMS plug-in because gdk-pixpuf-0 has been removed - Remove build-optional static library - Clean spec file up - Do not package XMMS plug-in pixmaps +- Remove patch changing default offset to keep closer with upstream +- Update upstream URLs
* Tue Feb 08 2011 Fedora Release Engineering rel-eng@lists.fedoraproject.org - 2.2.14-14 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_15_Mass_Rebuild
--- Approving.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com 2012-01-13 08:09:53 EST --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: xosd New Branches: Owners: ppisar InitialCC:
Please assign this deprecated package in rawhide (F17) to me and make it undeprecated.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com 2012-01-13 08:24:51 EST --- Unretired, take ownership in pkgdb.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
--- Comment #6 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com 2012-01-13 08:55:16 EST --- Thank you for the review and the unretiring. Rel-engs have been asked to unblock this package in F17 (https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5028).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |xosd-2.2.14-15.fc17 Resolution| |RAWHIDE Last Closed| |2012-01-30 04:49:21
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: xosd New Branches: el6 Owners: ppisar
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- xosd-2.2.14-16.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xosd-2.2.14-16.el6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- xosd-2.2.14-16.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |hfk@galaxy.forbanna.net
--- Comment #11 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com --- *** Bug 1471023 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- xosd-2.2.14-24.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-203bf9e58e
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ON_QA Resolution|ERRATA |--- Keywords| |Reopened
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- xosd-2.2.14-24.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-203bf9e58e
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756780
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed|2012-01-30 04:49:21 |2017-07-31 12:20:33
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- xosd-2.2.14-24.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org