|Summary:||Review Request: move - Move file(s) to ~/.trash directory|
|Product:||[Fedora] Fedora||Reporter:||pjp <pj.pandit>|
|Component:||Package Review||Assignee:||Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>|
|Status:||CLOSED DUPLICATE||QA Contact:||Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>|
|Version:||rawhide||CC:||fedora-package-review, mtasaka, notting, rc040203|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2008-07-25 10:40:03 UTC||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Cloudforms Team:||---||Target Upstream Version:|
Description pjp 2008-06-11 12:28:55 UTC
SPEC URL: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/move.spec SRPM URL: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/move-1.2-1.fc8.src.rpm Description: move moves the named file(s) to the ~/.trash directory. Trash is located under the home directory of a user. It is a simple console based utility, I wrote after deleting some files, which I couldn't retrieve back. Move can also restore file(s) back to there original location. It has really proved very handy to me. This is my second fedora package, and am looking for a sponsor for this and my earlier package tlock. I'd really appreciate if somebody could come forward for the sponsorship. tlock: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444952 Thank you!
Comment 1 Ralf Corsepius 2008-06-11 19:28:35 UTC
Some remarks: 1. I do not consider this application to be useful, because it aims at implementing "yet another backing-up mv" replacement, using the "n-th" non-standardized mechanism. 2. Naming an application "move" is a bad choice, because it's such a general name that it's likely colliding with many other applications/scripts users may have installed. Provided this, I am not interested in formally reviewing this packages (This shouldn't preventr others from doing so.). Some technical remarks: * The package doesn't acknowledge CFLAGS. The cause is this bug in Makefile: --- Makefile.am~ 2008-06-11 21:18:07.000000000 +0200 +++ Makefile.am 2008-06-11 21:18:07.000000000 +0200 @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ ## 6. automake -ac --foreign ## -CFLAGS = -D_GNU_SOURCE +AM_CPPFLAGS = -D_GNU_SOURCE bin_PROGRAMS = move move_SOURCES = move.c movedb.c move.h movedb.ham: * The spec file uses /sbin/install-info => Missing: Requires(pre) etc.
Comment 2 pjp 2008-06-12 07:02:39 UTC
Hello Ralf, thanks for the technical comments. I've replaced CFLAGS with the AM_CFLAGS. Please see the new files at SPEC: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/move.spec SORC: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/move-1.2.tar.gz SRPM: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/move-1.2-2.fc8.src.rpm > * The spec file uses /sbin/install-info > => Missing: Requires(pre) etc. About this Requires(pre), is it necessary if there is no %pre section in the spec file? Thanks!
Comment 3 Mamoru TASAKA 2008-06-12 15:28:18 UTC
Well, now the package itself seems okay (althogh I recommend to use ------------------------------------------------------------- make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p" ------------------------------------------------------------- to keep timestamps on installed file), however I also think that the name "move" is too generic...
Comment 4 pjp 2008-06-13 09:26:48 UTC
Hello Mamoru, thanks for the comments. I've made the changes. Please see the latest files at SPEC: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/move.spec SRPM: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/move-1.2-3.fc8.src.rpm > however I also think that the name "move" is too generic... I do understand; But I really don't think it's practical to rename it..is it that big a hurdle? Thanks!
Comment 5 Patrice Dumas 2008-06-13 12:00:51 UTC
(In reply to comment #4) > I do understand; But I really don't think it's practical to rename it..is it > that big a hurdle? Yes, it is. Did you approach upstream to ask them why they used such a generic name?
Comment 6 pjp 2008-06-13 13:07:37 UTC
> Yes, it is. Did you approach upstream to ask them why they used such > a generic name? Well, when I wrote Move it seemed like a sensible name, and it still does to me. It speaks about it's action, and is intuitive that way. Why is it that big a deal?
Comment 7 Patrice Dumas 2008-06-13 13:14:31 UTC
It is too generic. Many programs can do the same than yours, none should be called move, except if there is a standard endorsing the name.
Comment 8 pjp 2008-06-17 05:22:45 UTC
(In reply to comment #7) > It is too generic. Many programs can do the same than yours, none should > be called move, except if there is a standard endorsing the name. What name would you suggest? Trash?? $ trash <file-name>
Comment 9 Jean-François Martin 2008-06-17 07:22:30 UTC
> What name would you suggest? Trash?? > > $ trash <file-name> > I have a package (not yet reviewed) that already use $ trash <file> See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448122448122
Comment 10 pjp 2008-06-17 08:22:43 UTC
> I have a package (not yet reviewed) that already use > $ trash <file> Gawd...will ptrash do? I cann't believe I'm haggling for a name now.
Comment 11 Patrice Dumas 2008-06-17 10:00:40 UTC
ptrash would be perfect in my opinion.
Comment 12 pjp 2008-07-23 09:43:19 UTC
Hello all, Please see: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456385 Thank you!