August 2018 - rpmfusion-developers

[Bug 4757] New: Review Request: mupen64plus - Nintendo 64 Emulator

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4757 Bug ID: 4757 Summary: Review Request: mupen64plus - Nintendo 64 Emulator Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: x86_64 OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: wberrier(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org namespace: free There have been some previous review requests: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=303 https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=908 It was also suggested to try to get this package into fedora since they allow emulators now. Baby steps... Here's a link to the src rpm: http://berrier.org/tmp/mupen64plus-2.5-2.fc27.src.rpm I got the src.rpm from: https://versaweb.dl.sourceforge.net/project/postinstaller/fedora/releases... but made a few changes, which are listed in the spec file. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

3 years, 5 months

1
15
0 / 0

[Bug 4779] New: Review request: gjots2 - gjots2 is a fairly simple jotter (outline processor) application for your desktop.

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4779 Bug ID: 4779 Summary: Review request: gjots2 - gjots2 is a fairly simple jotter (outline processor) application for your desktop. Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: x86_64 URL: https://sourceforge.net/projects/gjots2/ OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: bob.hepple(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2, 30 namespace: free Source rpm: https://sourceforge.net/projects/gjots2/files/gjots2/3.0.2/gjots2-3.0.2-1... Spec file: https://sourceforge.net/projects/gjots2/files/gjots2/3.0.2/gjots2.spec/do... Description: gjots2 ("gee-jots" or, if you prefer, "gyachts"!) is a way to marshall and organise your text notes in a convenient, hierarchical way. For example, use it for all your notes on Unix, personal bits and pieces, recipes and even PINs and passwords (encrypted with ccrypt(1), gpg(1) or openssl(1)). You can also use it to "mind-map" your compositions - write down all your thoughts and then start to organise them into a tree. By manipulating the tree you can easily reorder your thoughts and structure them appropriately. Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora? Version 2 is is fedora for several years but I have been unable to get them to upgrade to version 3 (numerous emails and bug reports). Version 2 is only applicable to Centos-6 while Centos-7 requires version 3. rpmlint messages are trivial (below) THis is my first rpmfusion package I am seeking a sponsor. 0 11:33 rpmbuild/ $ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/gjots2-3.0.2-1.201801081627.noarch.rpm gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Organise -> Organist, Organism, Organize gjots2.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot C A note jotter. Organise your ideas, notes, facts in a hierarchy. gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gyachts -> yachts, g yachts gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US marshall -> Marshall, marshal, marshals gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US organise -> organist, organism, organize gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ccrypt -> crypt, c crypt gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpg -> pg, gig, gag gjots2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US openssl -> slope gjots2.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/docbook2gjots gjots2.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/bin/gjots2 /usr/bin/env python gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2docbook gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2emacs gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2html gjots2.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/bin/gjots2html.py /usr/bin/env python gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2lpr gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/gjots2org gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/bin/org2gjots gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/__init__.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/common.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/file.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/find.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/general.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/gui.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/prefs.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/printDialog.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/sortDialog.py gjots2.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gjots2/version.py gjots2.noarch: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/doc gjots2.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/gjots2/COPYING gjots2.noarch: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/man gjots2.noarch: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/man/man1 gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gjots2emacs gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gjots2html.py gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gjots2lpr gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gjots2org gjots2.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary org2gjots gjots2.noarch: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/gjots2/INSTALL gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/cs/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/de_DE/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/en_US/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/nb/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/no/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/ru/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sl/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sv/LC_MESSAGES/gjots2.mo gjots2.noarch: E: invalid-appdata-file /usr/share/appdata/gjots2.appdata.xml 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 25 errors, 25 warnings. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2 [Bug 2] Tracker: New packages awaiting review https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30 [Bug 30] Tracker : Sponsorship Request -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

3 years, 5 months

1
3
0 / 0

[Bug 4958] New: Review request: sch_cake-kmod - Kernel module (kmod) for sch_cake

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4958 Bug ID: 4958 Summary: Review request: sch_cake-kmod - Kernel module (kmod) for sch_cake Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: All OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: dagofthedofg(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org namespace: free URLs: https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake-kmod.spec https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake.spec https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake-kmod-0-1.fc28.sr... https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: Kernel Module containing Cake queueing discipline(qdisc). https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/CakeTechnical/ Justification: Kernel modules are not allowed in the stock Fedora Repositories rpmlint: $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/sch_cake-kmod-0-1.fc28.src.rpm sch_cake-kmod.src:6: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 6, tab: line 6) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. # Not sure what warning is, checked for spaces and didn't see any where specified in spec file $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.src.rpm sch_cake.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kmod -> mod, k mod, mood sch_cake.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C sch_cake sch_cake.src:1: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 1) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. # Summary follows convention of other rpmfusion kmods including crystalhd # Again not sure what spacing warning is, spec file looks clean $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/akmod-sch_cake-0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm akmod-sch_cake.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. # No documentation provided upstream, usage info contained in source files $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/kmod-sch_cake-0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm kmod-sch_cake.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Metapackage -> Meta package, Meta-package, Prepackage kmod-sch_cake.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. # kmodtool generates Summary, no way to tweak it without it being fixed upstream # No documentation provided upstream $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm sch_cake.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kmod -> mod, k mod, mood sch_cake.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C sch_cake sch_cake.x86_64: E: no-binary sch_cake.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings. # Summary follows convention of other rpmfusion kmods # userland package, no binaries included # No documentation provided upstream Notes: This is my first RPMFusion package submission I am seeking a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

3 years, 5 months

1
4
0 / 0

[Bug 4960] New: Review request: sch_cake - Kernel module (kmod) for sch_cake

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4960 Bug ID: 4960 Summary: Review request: sch_cake - Kernel module (kmod) for sch_cake Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: All OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: dagofthedofg(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org namespace: free URLs: https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake.spec https://github.com/survient/sch_cake/raw/master/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.src.rpm Description: sch_cake common files. https://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/codel/wiki/CakeTechnical/ Justification: Kernel modules are not allowed in the stock Fedora Repositories rpmlint: $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.src.rpm sch_cake.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kmod -> mod, k mod, mood sch_cake.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C sch_cake sch_cake.src:1: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 1) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. # Summary follows convention of other rpmfusion kmods including crystalhd # Not sure what spacing warning is, spec file looks clean $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/sch_cake-0-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm sch_cake.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kmod -> mod, k mod, mood sch_cake.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C sch_cake sch_cake.x86_64: E: no-binary sch_cake.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings. # Summary follows convention of other rpmfusion kmods # userland package, no binaries included # No documentation provided upstream Notes: This is my first RPMFusion package submission I am seeking a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

3 years, 5 months

1
4
0 / 0

[Bug 3863] New: Review request: game-data-packager - Installer for game data files

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3863 Bug #: 3863 Summary: Review request: game-data-packager - Installer for game data files 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: alexandre.detiste(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Various games are divided into two logical parts: engine and data. . game-data-packager is a tool which builds .rpm files for game data which cannot be distributed (such as commercial game data). Almost all ScummVM, Doom, Quake games are supported + others. http://pkg-games.alioth.debian.org/game-data/ ------------- http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-games/game-data-packager.git/tree/tool... The RPM support has been added _after_ the last release, so I temporary use dummy snapshot tarballs until next release. These are built this way: git archive --prefix=game-data-packager/ --format tar.gz master > ../rpmbuild/SOURCES/game-data-packager.tar.gz Which makes rmplint complain: "game-data-packager.src: W: invalid-url Source0: game-data-packager.tar.gz" ------------- This tool originated in Debian "contrib", because it's free software, but of no use without non-free assets; likewise it doesn't belong in Fedora. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279177 : "game-data-packager's sole purpose is to repackage non-free game resources into distro packages. As such it has no place in Fedora itself." --------------------------- remaining rpmlint: game-data-packager.noarch: E: zero-length /etc/game-data-packager/quake3-mirrors well, maybe GDP should use data from filewatcher to enhance it's mirror lists. either at build-time (bad, need internet acces), from time to time, or at run time. We have SHA1 hashes for files, so the source doesn't much matter. http://www.filewatcher.com/m/linuxq3apoint-1.32b-3.x86.run.30923961-0.html game-data-packager.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/game-data-packager that's not a script intended to be run, but a script fragement to be sourced game-data-packager.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/games/game-data-packager/game_data_packager/games/__init__.py game-data-packager.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/games/game-data-packager/game_data_packager/version.py game-data-packager.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/games/game-data-packager/game_data_packager/paths.py these are generated during the build, a shebang could be added too ----- This is my first RPM Fusion package. ------- upstream Makefile lacks a "make install" rule; having this would allow to trim the specfile. -- 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.

3 years, 8 months

1
29
0 / 0

[Bug 2929] New: Review Request: smtube - A Youtube browser that can play and download Youtube videos

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2929 Bug #: 2929 Summary: Review Request: smtube - A Youtube browser that can play and download Youtube videos 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: cickumqt(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Spec URL: http://cicku.me/smtube.spec SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/smtube-1.8-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: SMTube is a Youtube browser which allows to search, play and download Youtube videos. This project is based on some code from UMPlayer. Reason for not in Fedora: It needs smplayer. -- 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.

4 years, 6 months

1
7
0 / 0

[Bug 4041] New: Review request: mendeleydesktop - rpm of Mendeley

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4041 Bug #: 4041 Summary: Review request: mendeleydesktop - rpm of Mendeley 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: mark.harfouche(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org This is a repackaged version of what is available on the Mendeley website and attempts to make use of system libraries instead of the ones packaged with Mendeley. srpm: http://markharfouche.com/~makerpm/mendeleydesktop-1.16.1-2.fc23.src.rpm Source rpmlint: $ rpmlint /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mendeleydesktop-1.16.1-2.fc23.src.rpm mendeleydesktop.src: W: invalid-license Proprietary 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Binary rpmlint: $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-23-x86_64/result/mendeleydesktop-1.16.1-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm mendeleydesktop.x86_64: W: invalid-license Proprietary mendeleydesktop.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libPDFNetC.so libPDFNetC.so mendeleydesktop.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libPDFNetC.so exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5 mendeleydesktop.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libMendeley.so.1.16.1 exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5 mendeleydesktop.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mendeleydesktop 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. Justification for errors: W: invalid-license: Proprietary license is why I need RPMFusion E: invalid-soname can't change that. The source is a binary. W: shared-lib-calls-exit: I don't know what this means. I don't think I can change it W: no-manual-page-for-binary: I don't think this is necessary. Also, this was a binary software. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-23-x86_64/result/mendeleydesktop-devel-1.16.1-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm mendeleydesktop-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license Proprietary mendeleydesktop-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib mendeleydesktop-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib <- I don't know what this means W: no-documentation <- this is a devel package My first RPMFusion package. I am seeking a sponsor. -- 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.

4 years, 10 months

1
58
0 / 0

[Bug 4750] New: Review request: deepin-music - Deepin Music Player

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4750 Bug ID: 4750 Summary: Review request: deepin-music - Deepin Music Player Product: Package Reviews Version: Current Hardware: x86_64 OS: GNU/Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: Review Request Assignee: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Reporter: sztsian(a)gmail.com CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org, sensor.wen(a)gmail.com Blocks: 2 namespace: free Spec URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/rpmfusion/deepin-music.spec SRPM URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/rpmfusion/deepin-music-3.1.7.2-2.f... Description: Deepin Music Player Fedora Account System Username: zsun RPMFusion FAS Username: zsun * Why this package is not eligible to be included in Fedora: This depends on some codec that are not accepted in Fedora. * This is my second RPM Fusion package. (The other is bug 4749 which is also just filed) * I am a current Fedora Packager * RPMlint: $ rpmlint *.rpm deepin-music.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found zh_CN deepin-music.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tweakful -> tweak deepin-music.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gstreamer -> streamer, g streamer, steamer deepin-music.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US quanpin -> piquant deepin-music.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tweakful -> tweak deepin-music.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gstreamer -> streamer, g streamer, steamer deepin-music.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US quanpin -> piquant For these above, they are from upstream and I believe they are expected. deepin-music.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/dbus-1/services/com.deepin.dde.music.service Upstream provided an empty file. https://github.com/linuxdeepin/deepin-music/blob/master/music-player/data... deepin-music.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deepin-music deepin-music.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/deepin-music.desktop file contains group "Next Shortcut Group", but groups extending the format should start with "X-" deepin-music.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/deepin-music.desktop file contains group "PlayPause Shortcut Group", but groups extending the format should start with "X-" deepin-music.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/deepin-music.desktop file contains group "Previous Shortcut Group", but groups extending the format should start with "X-" For desktop file related. This music player is originally part of Deepin Desktop Environment(Short as DDE), and above are written under DDE's way. So I believe I shouldn't modify them. deepin-music-debuginfo.x86_64: E: useless-provides debuginfo(build-id) For debuginfo(build-id), all packages built in rawhide contains this, so I assume this won't hurt. deepin-music-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation deepin-music-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib deepin-music-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 10 warnings. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2 [Bug 2] Tracker: New packages awaiting review -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

5 years

1
14
0 / 0

[Bug 3576] New: Review request: obs-studio - Open Broadcaster Software Studio

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3576 Bug #: 3576 Summary: Review request: obs-studio - Open Broadcaster Software Studio 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: fedorauser(a)fedoraproject.org CC: rpmfusion-package-review(a)rpmfusion.org Blocks: 2, 30 https://fedorauser.fedorapeople.org/obs-studio-0.9.0-1.fc21.src.rpm https://fedorauser.fedorapeople.org/obs-studio.spec Open Broadcaster Software is free and open source software for video recording and live streaming. OBS is not in Fedora because it depends on ffmpeg and other non free software. I need to be sponsored as this is my first package and I'm not sponsored in Fedora. OBS studio has some issues with placing files in correct location, there was a discussion about this (https://github.com/jp9000/obs-studio/pull/391). I think that all of these errors are related to this. rpmlint outputs: $ rpmlint SRPMS/obs-studio-0.9.0-1.fc21.src.rpm obs-studio.src:33: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib/libobs*.so* obs-studio.src:54: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/cmake/LibObs obs-studio.src:62: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/obs-plugins 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/obs-studio-0.9.0-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm obs-studio.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libobs.so.0 exit(a)GLIBC_2.2.5 obs-studio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libobsglad.so obs-studio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libobs.so obs-studio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libobs-opengl.so obs-studio.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/obs-studio/COPYING obs-studio.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary obs 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/obs-studio-devel-0.9.0-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm obs-studio-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/obs-studio-debuginfo-0.9.0-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 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.

5 years, 1 month

1
51
0 / 0

RPM Fusion mediacenter Spin

by Nicolas Chauvet

I had this project to try to build a dedicated Spin targeting media center Finally got something basically testable with an iso generated within koji for x86_64/ The idea is to be able to deploy a Kodi setup using RPM Fusion packages. (it could be based on another mediacenter solution if relevant). The current produced media is considered alpha state. Still lot of work to be done: - Setup a dedicated "product" to enable firewall, tuning and services options as appropriate - Enable initial setup tool - Have a mean to fetch dvb firmware files and others. - cockpit is bundled for remote administration - Better rely on comps group to install packages. - Have a dedicated page on the wiki. - Have an ostree version. Github with the kickstart: https://github.com/rpmfusion-infra/rpmfusion-kickstarts PS: please don't share the link widely yet http://koji.rpmfusion.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=210378 Anyone interested in helping this project ? -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

5 years, 3 months

6
11
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

rpmfusion-developers August 2018