Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: pdf-renderer - A 100% Java PDF renderer and viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466394
Summary: Review Request: pdf-renderer - A 100% Java PDF renderer and viewer Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: orcanbahri@yahoo.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/pdf-renderer.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/pdf-renderer-0-1.20081005cvs.fc10.src.rp... Description: The PDF Renderer is just what the name implies: an open source, all Java library which renders PDF documents to the screen using Java2D. Typically this means drawing into a Swing panel, but it could also draw to other Graphics2D implementations. It could be used to draw on top of PDFs, share them over a network, convert PDFs to PNG images, or maybe even project PDFs into a 3D scene. ----------------------------------------------------------------
Note: rpmlint gives a false warning on the SRPM: pdf-renderer.src:99: W: libdir-macro-in-noarch-package %{_libdir}/gcj/%{name} which can be ignored.
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=466394
Orcan Ogetbil orcanbahri@yahoo.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |465511
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=466394
--- Comment #1 from Orcan Ogetbil orcanbahri@yahoo.com 2008-10-09 23:14:05 EDT --- I know that the way I formulate the release number may not be the most ideal one. What is the best way of putting 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=466394
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-10-10 09:36:08 EDT --- Some comments:
* About versioning - Some maintaners use (and I recomment): 0-0.X.<cvs related number>%{?dist}
* native2ascii - build.log shows: ------------------------------------------------- 30 + find . -name '*.java' -exec native2ascii '{}' '{}' ';' 31 find: `native2ascii' 32 : Permission denied 33 find: `native2ascii' 34 : Permission denied 35 find: `native2ascii' .... ------------------------------------------------- Can these messages be ignored?
* Font .pfb - Would you check how these fonts file (binaries) are used? * If these files can be removed, please remove these. * If these files are really used, please replace these with fonts which are system-widely provided. These fonts are all in urw-fonts (i.e. BR: urw-fonts is needed if these fonts are needed). BaseFonts.properties also needs fixing in this case. And as (rpm says) urw-fonts are under GPL+, the license tag of this package should be changed to "LGPLv2+ and GPL+".
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=466394
--- Comment #3 from Orcan Ogetbil orcanbahri@yahoo.com 2008-10-10 16:37:15 EDT --- Thank you,
* I made the release number 0-0.X.<cvs related number>%{?dist}
* There are only a few files that have encoding issues and those are getting fixed properly. Hence the native2ascii warnings can be ignored.
* .pfb files are removed. But since they are needed by the program I hacked the code to use the system-fonts. Now urw-fonts is Required and the license is "LGPLv2+ and GPL+".
The final version of files:
SPEC: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/pdf-renderer.spec SRPM: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/pdf-renderer-0-0.2.20081005cvs.fc10.src....
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=466394
--- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-10-11 03:25:28 EDT --- Okay. Now one issue and one question
* License - Since you completely removed .pfb files from tarball, the license can be simply "LGPLv2+".
? XXXX.length in BaseFonts.properties - One question is that BaseFonts.properties contains lines like the following: ------------------------------------------------------------------ Courier-Bold.length=120373 ------------------------------------------------------------------ However on my system n022004l.pfb has 101592 bytes. Can these difference of size be ignored? If not (i.e. size should also be fixed), the following sample scripts may be useful. ------------------------------------------------------------------ #!/bin/sh
INPUT=BaseFonts.properties OUTPUT=BaseFonts.properties.1
FONTDIR=/usr/share/fonts/default/Type1
rm -f $OUTPUT cat $INPUT | while read line do newline=$line if echo $newline | grep -q 'file=.*pfb' then pfbname=$(echo $newline | sed -e 's|^.*file=||') newline=$(echo $newline | sed -e "s|file=|file=${FONTDIR}/|") elif echo $newline | grep -q 'length=' then size=$(ls -al ${FONTDIR}/$pfbname | awk '{print $5}') newline=$(echo $newline | sed -e "s|length=.*|length=$size|") fi echo $newline >> $OUTPUT done ------------------------------------------------------------------- (When size needs fixing and you use this script, "BuildRequires: urw-fonts" is needed to examine the size of the installed fonts)
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=466394
--- Comment #5 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil orcanbahri@yahoo.com 2008-10-11 04:17:18 EDT --- - I didn't think about the font sizes. I am not sure whether they are important, but for the sake of completeness I used your script to rewrite the BaseFonts.properties file, just in case... Thank you for the script.
- The license is set back to LGPLv2+.
- Files updated: SPEC: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/pdf-renderer.spec SRPM: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/pdf-renderer-0-0.3.20081005cvs.fc10.src....
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=466394
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-10-11 09:58:37 EDT --- Okay.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- This package (pdf-renderer) is APPROVED by mtasaka --------------------------------------------------------------------------
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=466394
Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil orcanbahri@yahoo.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |pdf-renderer Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil orcanbahri@yahoo.com 2008-10-11 15:16:21 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: pdf-renderer Short Description: A 100% Java PDF renderer and viewer Owners: oget Branches: InitialCC:
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=466394
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2008-10-12 22:08:23 EDT --- cvs done.
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=466394
Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil orcanbahri@yahoo.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org