[Bug 510734] Review Request: x11vnc - VNC server for the current X11 session

Wed Jul 29 23:10:47 UTC 2009

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

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=510734

--- Comment #34 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) <pahan at hubbitus.info>  2009-07-29 19:10:45 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> rpmlint RPMS/i386/x11vnc-debuginfo-0.9.8-3.fc10.i386.rpm 
> x11vnc-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
> /usr/src/debug/x11vnc-0.9.8/libvncserver/rfbregion.c
> x11vnc-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
> /usr/src/debug/x11vnc-0.9.8/libvncserver/auth.c
> [...]
Yes, I forgot -debuginfo package. Fix it now.

> But IMHO it looks bad for nearly all people since most others use tabwidth = 8.
> Just try to click on the link in your browser and the the lines will look
> somehow displaced. I suggest to convert it to spaces since that's a good
> compromise and it will look good for all people. ;-)
It is more useful when standard size - you always see where tab used, and where
not. I suggest you change settings. I think it is easy in any editor.

> No, it's just a convenience / some kind of standard in Fedora.
Can I read about similar things anywhere?

> I've asked on #fedora-devel and I got the impression that file based build
> requires are strongly discouraged. The main reason is the increased build time.
> I think we must not only consider the increased build time for single
> developers but also the increased load on the koji machines. 
This issue discussed many times in ml, f.e.
https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/rpm-devel/2004-October/000097.html but
there no 1 thing.

So, *correct* way in this case libXi-devel should provide xorg-x11-proto-devel
as it is replaced them. Other is hacks. File-based BuildRequire is semed more
beautiful and preferred for me.
And, I believe what increased build time is very small to count it...

> Use the macros consistently - one plain "rm" leaked in although you've used
> "%{__rm}" in all other places...  
Ok.

(In reply to comment #31)
> That's nonsense. I've been hacking Linux/OSS since -93 and spent few
> hours to solve that support case. If I would have seen a script name
> i suggested in rpm -ql x11vnc, i've run it and get help for client
> side command. I'd been done in 20min in such case.
Does not FAQ helps you in your search?

> jada jada jada, everyone here knows that mantra. And we already
> stated here why it doesn't apply here.
WHY?? I can't even imagine why we can't (try) be close to upstream. I try do it
when it is possible.

> I'm not saying that some particular person should come up with that script,
> I can draft it myself to get started with. What I'm saying, that we should
> make it inside Fedora. I'm also saying, that lack of it should not stop this
> review to be accepted, it can very well be added once it's working.  
I'm not argue with you startup try doing it is more easy, useful, friendly. I
am glad to see it... But why you do not want even try do it for all (in
upstream), not only for Fedora?

> (In reply to comment #32)
> ./configure --help seems to be a little bit misleading ;-)
> 
> Please use the following line:
> ./configure --with-system-libvncserver --without-tightvnc-filetransfer  

Indeed! Thank you.

What is very strange with epel. I make src.rpm on my Fedora 11 machin and than
try build it on koji and its failed with very strange non-clear fasion.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1564059 - build.log is
almost empty.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1564254 - build.log
absolutely absent!

Then, I pack src.rpm on CentOS, and its built sucessfull!
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1564269
On dist-f11 it built without problems too -
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1564385

http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora11/x11vnc/x11vnc-0.9.8-6.src.rpm
http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora11/x11vnc/x11vnc.spec

-- 
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.