https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 Alec Leamas <leamas.alec(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |leamas.alec(a)gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Alec Leamas <leamas.alec(a)gmail.com&gt; 2013-05-15 18:58:55 CEST --- Just some drive-by comments, or really questions: - Does the build process download the proprietary blobs during the build process? When I read your description this comes to my mind. - Does the build process require a valid DISPLAY since the specfile sets this? -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 --- Comment #3 from Rave <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de&gt; 2013-05-15 19:18:07 CEST --- (In reply to comment #1) No, the proprietary blobs are only needed for runtime after installing. Without that building fails, same as in the original srpm (nautilus-dropbox). https://linux.dropbox.com/fedora/pool/nautilus-dropbox-1.6.0-1.fedora.src... -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 --- Comment #5 from Rave <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de&gt; 2013-05-15 20:56:08 CEST --- (In reply to comment #4) If i found a solution about your second hint, i will contact dropbox. I'am giving up. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=5385151&name=build.... checking for pygtk... no This is the reason for using 'export DISPLAY=:0.0' Do you now a solution for this? Otherwise i will close the request and do what i ever did for 1 year, providing the package on a external repo. http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=276286 :( Wolfgang -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; 2013-05-15 22:32:26 CEST --- This was not explicitly stated but this package is only eligible to the RPM Fusion nonfree section, since it rely on a proprietary component (even if the code itself is GPL). Also I expect it will need to be ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64 since the dropbox binary might not be available elsewhere. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 --- Comment #9 from Rave <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de&gt; 2013-05-16 17:15:55 CEST --- @ Rex , you made my day. Using xvfb-run -a ... fix the build issue at koji. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5388448 Ok, i wanna describe more detail what happens if caja-dropbox is installed, for making it clearer. 1. Executing the dropbox menu entry open a popup window. "This will install the proprietary dropbox daemon, yes or not" 2. If yes than the download starts and create a ~.dropbox-dist folder. Same can be done with executing this command in a terminal. cd ~ && wget -O - "https://www.dropbox.com/download?plat=lnx.x86_64" | tar xzf - see https://www.dropbox.com/install?os=lnx 3. After the the download dropbox ask you for creating a account or to specify a existing account. 4. If all is done you see the dropbox icon (wich is part of the dropbox client daemon) in systray and you're connected with the cloud. In the ~.dropbox-dist folder is a ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS file which describe the using licenses of the daemon , if i undestand this right they use free licenses. Unfortunately english isn't my native language, so Im not shure if i understand this lawer speaking. If anyone could take a look into it, that would be very nice. http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/div/ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Using nonfree isn't a prob for me, if it is in general possible to build this package on rpmfusion. I prefer not to include the dropbox daemon into the package, because i prefer stay close to upstream nautilus-drobpox and i'm not shure if it is easy to change the code for this. But if nothing other helps.......... %changelog * Thu May 16 2013 Wolfgang Ulbrich <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de&gt; - 1.6.0-2 - use a fake X session to find pygtk2 BR, fix build server issue - fix autoconf/automake deprecations Spec URL: http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/RPMFUSION/SPECS/caja-dropbox.spec SRPM URL: http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/RPMFUSION/SRPM/caja-dropbox-1.6.0-2.fc20... -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 leigh scott <leigh123linux(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|2 |4 --- Comment #11 from leigh scott <leigh123linux(a)gmail.com&gt; 2013-07-20 19:21:55 CEST --- Package Approved Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - update-desktop-database is invoked when required Note: desktop file(s) in caja-dropbox See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. Suitable for rpmfusion-nonfree repo [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/leigh/2795 -caja-dropbox/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [?]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked when required Note: icons in caja-dropbox [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [?]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 4 files. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install if there is such a file. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: No rpmlint messages. ===== 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. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: 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. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [?]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: caja-dropbox-1.6.0-3.fc19.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint caja-dropbox 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- caja-dropbox (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/python hicolor-icon-theme libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libcaja-extension.so.1()(64bit) libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) mate-file-manager-extensions pygtk2 rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- caja-dropbox: caja-dropbox caja-dropbox(x86-64) libcaja-dropbox.so()(64bit) Unversioned so-files -------------------- caja-dropbox: /usr/lib64/caja/extensions-2.0/libcaja-dropbox.so Source checksums ---------------- https://linux.dropbox.com/packages/nautilus-dropbox-1.6.0.tar.bz2 : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 602147653877e4a7bad6c95c4bf307951907b82fffb4ac69a131ebcf18feb9ed CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 602147653877e4a7bad6c95c4bf307951907b82fffb4ac69a131ebcf18feb9ed Generated by fedora-review 0.4.1 (b2e211f) last change: 2013-04-29 Buildroot used: fedora-19-x86_64 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --other-bz https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org -b 2795 -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 leigh scott <leigh123linux(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |4 -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 --- Comment #14 from Wolfgang Ulbrich <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de&gt; 2013-07-20 20:09:37 CEST --- no, use this Short Description: Dropbox extension for mate-file-manager Do need a new cvs request? -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 --- Comment #16 from Wolfgang Ulbrich <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de&gt; 2013-07-20 20:50:20 CEST --- (In reply to comment #15) I prefer with "-", because this is the exactly package name to do not confuse users again. Yeah i know . forking issues results with caja as binary and mate-file-manager. Not my personal opinion, but upstream prefer to use extra names with mate included as package name, instead of using binary and libaries names. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2795 Wolfgang Ulbrich <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #17 from Wolfgang Ulbrich <chat-to-me(a)raveit.de&gt; 2013-07-21 18:45:18 CEST --- The import is done and builds for devel/f19/f18 have been done correctly. -- 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.