[Bug 544630] pyatspi - Python bindings for at-spi

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=544630


Joshua Roys <roysjosh@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |roysjosh@xxxxxxxxx




--- Comment #2 from Joshua Roys <roysjosh@xxxxxxxxx>  2010-01-07 09:29:37 EDT ---
? rpmlint (see comments at bottom)
  $ rpmlint -v 2/pyatspi.spec 
  0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
+ package name is fine
+ spec is %{name}.spec
+ meets packaging guidelines
? meets licensing guidelines
X license matches (appears to be only Library GPL v2, and there is no "later
version" clause in any of the source files - LGPLv2 without the +?)
+ COPYING is in %doc
+ spec is in American English
+ spec is legible
+ sources match
+ builds under mock
+ no ExcludeArch
+ build deps listed
+ no locales
+ no shared libraries in default paths
+ doesn't bundle a copy of a system library
+ not relocatable
+ directories appear sane
+ %files doesn't contain duplicates
+ %files has %defattr
+ %clean is correct
+ spec macros used consistently
+ package contains code
+ no large docs
+ %doc files are not required to run
+ no header files
+ no static libraries
+ no pkgconfig files
+ no libraries listed
+ no -devel package
+ no .la files
+ no gui applications
+ no duplicate file/dir ownership
+ %install clears buildroot
+ filenames are valid utf-8

If I build the package as-is and then run rpmlint on the resulting RPMs, I get:
  $ rpmlint -v /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/*.rpm
  pyatspi.src: I: checking
  pyatspi.x86_64: I: checking
  pyatspi.x86_64: E: no-binary
  pyatspi-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking
  pyatspi-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package
  3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.

... which made me wonder, could we compile this as a noarch rpm?  But then I
get:
  $ rpmlint -v /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/*.rpm
  pyatspi.noarch: I: checking
  pyatspi.noarch: E: noarch-python-in-64bit-path
/usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/pyatspi-dbus.pth

I don't know very much about python, or packaging python, but can we do without
that pth somehow?  Looking at it, perhaps not... although the contents appear
to be incorrect:
  $ cat usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/pyatspi-dbus.pth 
  import commands, sys; a = commands.getoutput('gconftool-2 --get
/desktop/gnome/interface/at-spi-dbus'); (a == 'true') and sys.path.insert(0,
'/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/pyatspi2')

The python bits aren't in that last dir,
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/pyatspi2 but in
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/pyatspi-dbus/pyatspi

Any ideas?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]