[Bug 434973] Review Request: scidavis

[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: scidavis


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=434973





------- Additional Comments From lkundrak at redhat.com  2008-03-24 10:38 EST -------
> > > > 2.) Try to specify an URL for these:
> > > > 
> > > > Source5:	application-x-scidavis.svg
> > > > Source6:	application-x-scidavis-32x32.png
> > > > Source7:	application-x-scidavis-48x48.png
> > > > Source8:	application-x-scidavis-128x128.png
> > > > 
> > > > Or at least a comment where did you get those.
> > > > Is it needed to include the pngs?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > They come from the svn version. I had some exchange with upstream about how to
> > > handle desktop and mime and this will be incuded in the next version.
> > 
> > This still doesn't seem correct to me. Is this the file?
> >
>
http://scidavis.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/*checkout*/scidavis/trunk/icons/scidavis-icon.svg?revision=709
> > 
> > If yes, please either specify it in Source: and rename when installing it, or at
> > least put a comment above it.
> > 
> > And the pngs -- are they needed? When it comes to icons; SVG is generally
> > sufficient.
> 
> The files are from
>
http://scidavis.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/scidavis/branches/current_stable/scidavis/icons/
> and it seems that the svg file is not sufficient

http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html#icon_lookup

SVG should be sufficient. Can you please describe in details how didn't it work
for you?

> > How about untarring it in %prep after %setup of Source0?
> > Either just untar it to directory where you are after it, or make some
> > constructive use of %setup macro. It can take a variety of useful, yet somewhat
> > tricky options: see [1].
> > 
> > [1] http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-macros.html
> 
> It seems now doc are better handled but i have a problem : the scidavis-manual
> package have the doc in /usr/share/doc/scidavis-manual-0.1.2/ but the scidavis
> binary file will look for manual in /usr/share/doc/scidavis-0.1.2/manual/
> 
> is it possible to do this ?

If the binary looks for manual, you can safely install the manual in
/usr/share/doc/scidavis-0.1.2/manual/, while nor being marked %doc.

Another solution would be to patch the program.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.