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=495942 --- Comment #7 from Christoph Wickert <fed...@christoph-wickert.de> 2009-04-23 11:16:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > I just talked to upstream, he gave me links to the source on SF. Argh, that was too simple ;) REVIEW FOR 0b9b2bc803e2fac3eb5396cb225c4a5a guimup-0.1.4-3.fc10.src.rpm OK - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines (GPLv3+). OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. OK - MUST: The license file from the source package is included in %doc. OK - MUST: The spec file is in American English. OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible. OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by MD5 eeccdd2ef671f191f2c9a7170df99244 OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on i386 N/A - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. N/A - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly with the %find_lang macro. N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates (none except in docdir). OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. The %files section includes a %defattr(...) line. OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content. N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage. OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application. N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. N/A - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a %{name}.desktop file, and that file is properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot}. OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. SHOULD Items: N/A - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. FAIL - SHOULD: The the package does not build in mock due to an libtool error. OK - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. FAIL - SHOULD: The package does not function as described, it initially crashes. N/A - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A - SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. N/A - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. Other items: OK - Review is not a duplicate OK - All relevant doc included OK - Timestamps are preserved both during downlad and install OK - Latest stable version packaged Issues and Suggestions: Doesn't build in mock due to a libtool error. Attaching build.log Remove INSTALL from %doc, it only contents generic info that is not important when installing from rpm. Remove the trailing backslash after INSTALL="install -p" Desktop file: The key "Encoding" is no longer valid, remove that line Change guimup.png to guimp, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Icon_tag_in_Desktop_Files Icon: Use the 48px Icon instead of 64px GenericName is not really generic, just "Client for MPD" is enough here Category "Application" is no longer valid, see http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html The package doesn't require any Gnome bits, so you better use the category GTK instead of GNOME. Add the categories Audio and Player to allow nested menus. All together it becomes: "Categories=GTK;AudioVideo;Audio;Player;" App crashes initially: $ guimup MPD: using /etc/mpd.conf MPD: user is Config: using /home/chris/.guimup.conf Autoconnecting, as configured No host name: using "localhost" Invalid port #: using 6600 32ece453-5526-63e6-087d32aa-0e594c9c is dumped The previous version compiled against the included version of libmpdclient works fine though. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review