[Bug 195585] Review Request: tetex-fonts-hebrew

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: tetex-fonts-hebrew


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195585





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-06-19 15:24 EST -------
Package failes to build in mock on x86_64, both FC5 and development.  The build
fails at:

cp: cannot stat `*.tfm': No such file or directory

Indeed, there are no .tfm files in the current directory when that is run.  This
is due to failures in %build:

+ make
./mkCLMtfm.sh
rm: cannot remove `culmus.map': No such file or directory
afm2tfm: fatal: afm file `/usr/share/fonts/hebrew/AharoniCLM-Bold.afm' not found.
afm2tfm: fatal: afm file `/usr/share/fonts/hebrew/AharoniCLM-Bold.afm' not found.
./mkCLMtfm.sh: line 47: vptovf: command not found
./mkCLMtfm.sh: line 48: vptovf: command not found
(repeated for each font).

I think you're missing a BuildRequires: tetex.  tetex-afm does not pull it in. 
Adding it lets things build, although I then see a bunch of errors from mkCLMtfm.sh:

./mkCLMtfm.sh
rm: cannot remove `culmus.map': No such file or directory
afm2tfm: fatal: afm file `/usr/share/fonts/hebrew/AharoniCLM-Bold.afm' not found.
afm2tfm: fatal: afm file `/usr/share/fonts/hebrew/AharoniCLM-Bold.afm' not found.
afm2tfm: fatal: afm file `/usr/share/fonts/hebrew/AharoniCLM-BoldOblique.afm'
not found.
afm2tfm: fatal: afm file `/usr/share/fonts/hebrew/AharoniCLM-BoldOblique.afm'
not found.
(and so on for many files)

I think this points to a missing BuildRequires: fonts-hebrew.  I still get:

./mkCLMtfm.sh
rm: cannot remove `culmus.map': No such file or directory

and a bunch of "I had to round some hights by X units" but it looks like the
package builds OK now.  (It actually built OK but didn't contain any tfm files
without the BR: fonts-hebrew; you might want to add some error-checking
somewhere.)  I am at a loss to see how this would build at all in mock as stated
in a previous comment.

Can you verify that you are the upstream for the source tarball?  Generally your
Source: tag includes a URL to the upstream source, but it's possible that for a
package like this the package is the upstream source.  I'm going to assume that
there is no upstream source here.

Once built, rpmlint has this to say:
W: tetex-fonts-hebrew incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.1-1 0.1-2.fc6

You don't seem to have added a changelog entry for what went into release 2.

W: tetex-fonts-hebrew dangling-symlink
/usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/culmus /usr/share/fonts/hebrew
W: tetex-fonts-hebrew dangling-symlink /usr/share/texmf/fonts/afm/public/culmus
/usr/share/fonts/hebrew

Symlinks into packages which are dependencies are OK.

W: tetex-fonts-hebrew symlink-should-be-relative
/usr/share/texmf/fonts/type1/public/culmus /usr/share/fonts/hebrew
W: tetex-fonts-hebrew symlink-should-be-relative
/usr/share/texmf/fonts/afm/public/culmus /usr/share/fonts/hebrew

Absolute symlinks aren't OK; these should be relative (a blocker).

You have various scriptlets which call texhash and updmap-sys but you don't
specify appropriate requirements for them:

Requires(post): tetex (or /usr/bin/texhash) (updmap-sys comes from tetex-fonts
which is a dependency of tetex; it should be OK to leave it out but you're free
to be more explicit if you like)
Requires(preun): tetex-fonts (or /usr/bin/updmap-sys)

(the postun requirement on /usr/bin/texhash is picked up by rpm automatically)

This package doesn't seem to own /usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public/culmus and
/usr/share/texmf/fonts/vf/public/culmus/, and nothing else in the repository
seems to either.  (/usr/share/texmf/fonts/tfm/public and
/usr/share/texmf/fonts/vf/public are owned by tetex-fonts which is in the
dependency tree).

Review:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  License text included in package.
O can't compare source against upstream as there is none.
O can't compare version agains upstream.
O BuildRequires are proper (one amended as above)
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
X rpmlint has valid complaints (see above).
* final provides and requires are sane:
   tetex-fonts-hebrew = 0.1-2.fc6
  =
   /bin/sh
   /usr/bin/texhash
   fonts-hebrew
   tetex
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
X owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* %check is not present; no test suite.
X scriptlets present; dependencies are not correct.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.