[Bug 924333] Review Request: mate-sensors-applet - MATE panel applet for hardware sensors

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

 



Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=924333

--- Comment #12 from Wolfgang Ulbrich <chat-to-me@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Naming: OK
> License: OK
> Packages installs and works: Yes.
> Package compiles on f18 and rawhide: Yes.
> 
> f18:
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5300293
> f20:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5300099
> 
> MUST: 
> 
> ===========
> BuildRequires
> ===========
> 
> Add:
> 1) gtk2-devel
Both gtk2-devel and dbus-glib-devel are called in configure.ac
GLIB_REQUIRED=2.26.0
GTK_REQUIRED=2.14.0
LIBPANEL_REQUIRED=1.1.0
LIBNOTIFY_REQUIRED=0.7.0
LIBCAIRO_REQUIRED=1.0.4
LIBDBUSGLIB_REQUIRED=0.80
LIBATASMART_REQUIRED=0.16
and gtk2-devel is also provide by dbus-glib-devel.
So what's the different?
But i will change it.
> 2) gsettings-desktop-schemas-devel
Why?
gsettings-desktop-schemas is an collection package of gsettings schemas for
gnome.
And the -devel subpackage is only needed for applications who needs the schemas
from gsettings-desktop-schemas.
I don't thing that mate-sensor-applet needs gnome gesettings files.
It compiles the gsettings schemas fine without it.
And i don't see this dependency in any debian package from mate upstream.
I know you do this in in a lot of packages.
So pls lighten me up, and explain more detailed why this is needed.

> 3)  (for disabling scrollkeeper)
I use --disable-scrollkeeper and i don't use BR scrollkepper.
And i see no file in /var/scrollkeeper.
IMO, rarian-compat is only needed if a package doesn't compile without
/usr/bin/scrollkeeper-config
which is provide by rarian-compat.
But maybe i'm wrong, pls correct me.

> 
> Drop:
> 
> 1) dbus-glib-devel (provided by gtk2-devel)
> 2) drop specific versioning for libatasmart-devel (is this really needed?)
np, i will remove specific versioning
> 
> ===========
> configure flags
> ===========
> 
> MUST:
> 1) Please add --disable-schemas-compile to the configure flags
will do it.
> 2) Is the nvidia flag required? Is there a way to get the aticonfig bit
> working?
It compiles the nvida part also without using the flag if BR libXNVCtrl-devel
is set, i use it so that everybody can see that the package is compiled for
nvidia usage.
Why is this a MUST not to do this?
I can't set the aticonfig bit because for this i need rpmfusion.
[root@mother rave]# yum provides */aticonfig
<snip>
xorg-x11-drv-catalyst-12.11-0.3.beta11.fc18.x86_64 : AMD's proprietary driver
                                                   : for ATI graphic cards
Repo        : rpmfusion-nonfree
Übereinstimmung von:
Dateiname     : /usr/bin/aticonfig

xorg-x11-drv-catalyst-13.1-1.fc18.x86_64 : AMD's proprietary driver for ATI
                                         : graphic cards
Repo        : rpmfusion-nonfree-updates
Übereinstimmung von:
Dateiname     : /usr/bin/aticonfig

xorg-x11-drv-catalyst-legacy-13.1-2.fc18.x86_64 : AMD's proprietary driver for
                                                : ATI legacy graphic cards
Repo        : rpmfusion-nonfree-updates
Übereinstimmung von:
Dateiname     : /usr/bin/aticonfig

> 
> SHOULD:
> 
> ===========
> rpmlint
> ===========
> 
> 1) Please fix usage of spaces and tabs in spec file. Preferably use spaces
> over tabls.
will do it.
> 
> 
> ===========
> Macros
> ===========
> 
> 1) Under postun you can put all of the scriplets under one if/fi section.
thx, for the hint.
> 
> 
> ===========
> Other
> ===========
> 
> Is the sed/libtool command really needed? If so can you submit a pull
> request upstream so that it's not? If not, why?
Yes, this is a valid command for fedora's packages to avoid a rpmlint warning.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#unused-direct-shlib-dependency

-- 
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=0Y0yHAaDK5&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





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