[Bug 2344534] Review Request: awatcher - A window activity and idle watcher

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2344534



--- Comment #14 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to wojnilowicz from comment #11)
> (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #10)
> > Some problems with associating spec parts with the correct subpackage:
> > 
> > > Requires:       aw-server-rust
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > > # Hopefuly one day it will be a part of aw-server-rust
> > > # https://github.com/ActivityWatch/activitywatch/issues/92#issuecomment-1583938452
> > > Provides:       bundled(aw-server-rust)
> > 
> > and all of:
> > 
> > > %post
> > > %systemd_user_post %{watcher_name}.service
> > > %preun
> > > %systemd_user_preun %{watcher_name}.service
> > > %postun
> > > %systemd_user_postun_with_restart %{watcher_name}.service
> > 
> > These all need to be associated with the "aw-awatcher" subpackage, otherwise
> > they won't have any effect.
> 
> Done.

No, this is not done. You moved the Provides and Requires, not didn't adapt the
scriptlets.

The scriptlets need to be associated with the correct package name too, just
like %package, %description, and %files:

"""
%post -n %{watcher_name}
%systemd_user_post %{watcher_name}.service

%preun -n %{watcher_name}
%systemd_user_preun %{watcher_name}.service

%postun -n %{watcher_name}
%systemd_user_postun_with_restart %{watcher_name}.service
"""

> > I wonder if it could make sense to just name the "source" package
> > "aw-awatcher" instead?
> > That would let you avoid this kind of issue.
> 
> The project is named awatcher though, and I feel comfortable with that name.
> That would avoid this kind of issue, but wouldn't make me aware of it.

What do you mean "wouldn't make me aware of it"? The issue could simply not
occur.

> > The project also provides a .desktop file, would you like to package that?
> 
> No. That would be needed if I would target for a bundle with aw-server-rust
> and would get an executable. I'm targeting for a non-executable plugin that
> would be loaded by aw-server-rust.

Ok, this makes sense.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2344534

Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202344534%23c14

-- 
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux