[Bug 1490054] Review Request: scidavis - Application for Scientific Data Analysis and Visualization

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1490054



--- Comment #29 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Alexander Ploumistos from comment #28)
> (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #27)
> > Issues:
> > =======
> > - Package does not use a name that already exists.
> >   Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check
> >   https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/scidavis
> >   See:
> >  
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/
> > NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Package_Names
> > 
> > This is review is considered as an "unorphaning" process.
> > 
> > - update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package
> >   contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry.
> >   Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in scidavis
> >   See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop-
> >   database
> > 
> > No longer used on Fedora.
> 
> Nothing to do here, right?

Yes.

> 
> > GPLv2+ and GPLv3+ are compatible licenses; you can use GPLv3+ as resultant 
> > license.
> 
> Really??? It always seemed logical, but since I am not proficient in
> legalese I didn't question it. Do you want me to update the spec, or should
> I leave it for the next build?

Update, please.

> 
> > [?]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
> >      Note: Directories without known owners:
> >      /usr/share/icons/locolor/16x16, /usr/share/icons/locolor/32x32/apps,
> >      /usr/share/icons/locolor/16x16/apps, /usr/share/mime,
> >      /usr/share/mime/packages, /usr/share/icons/locolor,
> >      /usr/share/icons/locolor/32x32, /usr/share/icons/locolor/22x22,
> >      /usr/share/icons/locolor/22x22/apps
> > 
> > '/usr/share/icons/locolor' looks not owned by any package.
> > I think you can permit 'scidavis' owns it, use:
> > 
> > %dir %{_datadir}/icons/locolor
> 
> On my system, I see a bunch of icons under /usr/share/icons/locolor,
> belonging to libreoffice, kimagemapeditor, krename and kxsldbg. I don't
> think scidavis should take ownership…
> 
> 

Fine.
'/usr/share/icons/locolor' is owned by kde-filesystem; this means that we need
install 'scidavis' and 'kde-filesystem' together.

> 
> > Rpmlint
> > -------
> > Checking: scidavis-1.21-4.fc28.x86_64.rpm
> >           python2-scidavis-1.21-4.fc28.x86_64.rpm
> >           scidavis-debuginfo-1.21-4.fc28.x86_64.rpm
> >           scidavis-1.21-4.fc28.src.rpm
> > scidavis.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scriptability ->
> > script ability, script-ability, inscrutability
> > scidavis.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US extensibility ->
> > sensibility, extensible
> > python2-scidavis.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
> > python2-scidavis.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> > scidavis-debuginfo.x86_64: E: useless-provides debuginfo(build-id)
> 
> Are these errors because rpmlint hasn't caught up with the system wide
> debugging changes, or have I messed up something?

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1489096

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux