[Bug 2838] New: "Review request: lttng-modules - LTTng 2.x kernel tracer modules"
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2838
Bug #: 2838
Summary: "Review request: lttng-modules - LTTng 2.x kernel
tracer modules"
Classification: Unclassified
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: yannick.brosseau(a)gmail.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
This is my first packages on RPM Fusion (I'm a fedora packager). They cannot go
in fedora, since they are kernel modules.
SPEC: http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/kernel/lttng-modules.spec
SRPM:
http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/kernel/lttng-modules-2.1.2...
%description
The LTTng project aims at providing highly efficient tracing tools for Linux.
Its tracers help tracking down performance issues and debugging problems
involving multiple concurrent processes and threads. Tracing across multiple
systems is also possible.
This package contains the LTTng kernel modules. These provide
the ring buffer library and the kernel tracer itself
rpmlint output:
[scientist@fedora rpmbuild]$ rpmlint SPECS/lttng-modules.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[scientist@fedora rpmbuild]$ rpmlint
/home/scientist/rpmbuild/SRPMS/lttng-modules-2.1.2-1.fc18.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[scientist@fedora rpmbuild]$ rpmlint
/home/scientist/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/lttng-modules-2.1.2-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm
lttng-modules.x86_64: E: no-binary
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
7 years, 2 months
[Bug 3953] New: Review request: dwarffortress - A single-player procedurally generated fantasy game
by RPM Fusion Bugzilla
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3953
Bug #: 3953
Summary: Review request: dwarffortress - A single-player
procedurally generated fantasy game
Classification: Unclassified
Product: Package Reviews
Version: Current
Platform: All
OS/Version: GNU/Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P5
Component: Review Request
AssignedTo: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
ReportedBy: rosser.bjr(a)gmail.com
CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org
Source URL:
https://www.acm.jhu.edu/~bjr/fedora/dwarffortress/rpmfusion/dwarffortress...
SRPM URL:
https://www.acm.jhu.edu/~bjr/fedora/dwarffortress/rpmfusion/dwarffortress...
Description: Dwarf Fortress is a single-player fantasy game. You can control a
dwarven outpost or an adventurer in a randomly generated, persistent world.
Although Dwarf Fortress is still in a work in progress, many features have
already been implemented.
Dwarf Fortress is free to redistribute, but is not open source.
Why rpmfusion(-nonfree): Dwarf Fortress is not open source, so cannot be
included in Fedora. However, there is an open source component (the graphics
library) that should be compiled and linked against the system libraries
(rather than the bundled ones included in the download).
Other comments:
This work is mostly based on the work done for Arch Linux (see
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/multilib/x86_64/dwarffortress/)
As I mentioned on the list, this is my first rpmfusion package, but I *am* a
sponsored Fedora packager.
Since then, I've updated the spec for the newest upstream release of DF and
also broken up the archive; rather than place it in /opt, I've opted to put the
"binaries" into %_libexecdir and the data into %_datadir. The "dwarffortress"
script originally written for Arch Linux has been adjusted; it creates a DF
installation in ~/.dwarffortress from these locations and then executes out of
there, using symlinks.
Another thing to please note is that the package only builds on i686 so I have
made use of the "ExclusiveArch" tag.
rpmlint output:
[bjr@irune SPECS]$ rpmlint ../RPMS/i686/dwarffortress-0.42.05-3.fc22.i686.rpm
dwarffortress.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) procedurally -> procedural
dwarffortress.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dwarven -> warden
dwarffortress.i686: W: invalid-license Dwarf Fortress
dwarffortress.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/libexec/dwarffortress/Dwarf_Fortress ['$ORIGIN']
dwarffortress.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/libexec/dwarffortress/libgraphics.so
dwarffortress.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dwarffortress
[bjr@irune SPECS]$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-22-i386/result/dwarffortress-0.42.05-3.fc22.src.rpm
dwarffortress.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) procedurally -> procedural
dwarffortress.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dwarven -> warden
dwarffortress.src: W: invalid-license Dwarf Fortress
dwarffortress.src:45: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
dwarffortress.src:77: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir}
dwarffortress.src:77: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
dwarffortress.src:77: W: macro-in-comment %{optdir}
Of these, I think the main objections that aren't spelling errors or comments
are:
-The rpath/unstripped binary error/warning. Dwarf_Fortress is the actual
"binary" that is closed-source; I don't think we can do anything about this.
-The license. Is there a specific way I should reference a custom license? The
Dwarf Fortress license text is as follows:
"Copyright (c) 2002-2012. All rights are retained by Tarn Adams, save the
following: you may redistribute the binary and accompanying files, unmodified,
provided you do so free of charge. If you'd like to distribute a modified
version of the game or portion of the archive and are worried about copyright
infringement, please contact Tarn Adams at toadyone(a)bay12games.com.
This software is still in development, and this means that there are going to
be problems, including serious problems that, however unlikely, might damage
your system or the information stored on it. Please be aware of this before
playing."
For testing purposes a RPM repository is available here:
https://www.acm.jhu.edu/~bjr/fedora/dwarffortress/ (along with the public GPG
key). I've tested these packages on both Fedora 22 and Fedora 23.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
7 years, 2 months