Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=917365 --- Comment #9 from Truong Anh Tuan <tuanta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #8) Thanks for reviewing my package. Here is the newly updated spec and source files: Spec URL: http://tuanta.fedorapeople.org/ibus-bogo/ibus-bogo.spec SRPM URL: http://tuanta.fedorapeople.org/ibus-bogo/ibus-bogo-0.3-3.fc18.src.rpm Also, please see my additional comments below: > Well, mock build still fails with: > > /bin/sh: pyside-lupdate: command not found > make[2]: *** [config-gui/CMakeFiles/translations] Error 127 > > But I could work around this by installing pyside-tools. This has been updated to BuildRequires > Here is the review. Summary: > > * ibus-bogo-settings does not start under F18, with errors like: > > SyntaxError: Non-ASCII character '\xe1' in file > > (perhaps it depends on locale settings) I will check with upstream developers. Since this issue does not effect to main program (the Vietnamese keyboard typing) but just the settings module, can we still push the package to Fedora repos? (while checking with them) > * Good to borrow the snippet for generating icon cache: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache Updated. > * Good to preserve timestamps of installed files with: > > make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p" Updated. > * Does it include any arch-dependent files? If not, it can be BuildArch: > noarch. BuildArch has been set to noarch. > Package Review > ============== > > Key: > [x] = Pass > [!] = Fail > [-] = Not applicable > [?] = Not evaluated > [ ] = Manual review needed > > > Issues: > ======= > - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in > the spec URL. > Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/ueno/Downloads/review- > ibus-bogo/diff.txt > See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL Updated. > - update-desktop-database is invoked when required > Note: desktop file(s) in ibus-bogo > See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache > - gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked when required > Note: icons in ibus-bogo > See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache Updated. <snipped> > ===== SHOULD items ===== > > Generic: > [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate > file > from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. > [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). Can you explain more what I need to do here? > [?]: Package functions as described. > [x]: Latest version is packaged. > [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. > [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. If this note is mandatory, I will work with upstream developers to have them. > [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains > translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. > [!]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported > architectures. Updated to "noarch" > [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. > [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. Updated. <snipped> > Rpmlint > ------- > Checking: ibus-bogo-0.3-2.fc20.x86_64.rpm > ibus-bogo.x86_64: E: no-binary > ibus-bogo.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/ibus-bogo/config-gui/controller.py 0644L /usr/bin/env > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. Could you please recheck the new version for me. Also, can you tell me more what/how I should do here. Note that this program is written in python scripts without any binaries at all. > Rpmlint (installed packages) > ---------------------------- > # rpmlint ibus-bogo > ibus-bogo.x86_64: E: no-binary > ibus-bogo.x86_64: E: non-executable-script > /usr/share/ibus-bogo/config-gui/controller.py 0644L /usr/bin/env > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. > # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Same as above. <snipped> -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=FKJbrrzgoE&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review