https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847755
Bastien Nocera <bnoc...@redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |bnoc...@redhat.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org |bnoc...@redhat.com
--- Comment #3 from Bastien Nocera <bnoc...@redhat.com> ---
Package Review
==============
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
==== C/C++ ====
[x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: MUST Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
==== Generic ====
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot}
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[-]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: MUST Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: MUST Development files must be in a -devel package
[-]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macro.
[x]: MUST Package is named using only allowed ascii characters.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) GStreamer ->
G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
GStreamer -> G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.src: W: strange-permission gst-p-bad-cleanup.sh
0775L
Make that 755 instead.
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.src:18: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
gst-plugins-bad-free-0.11.93.tar.xz
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) GStreamer
-> G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
GStreamer -> G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/gstreamer-1.0/libgstvideoparsersbad.so ['/usr/lib64']
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/gstreamer-1.0/libgstcamerabin2.so ['/usr/lib64']
A couple of rpaths see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-0.11.93/COPYING
Please file a bug
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l
en_US GStreamer -> G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-extras.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l
en_US GStreamer -> G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-extras.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l
en_US gstreamer -> streamer, g streamer, steamer
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-extras.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l
en_US mythtv -> myth
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-extras.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l
en_US fbdev -> bedevil
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-extras.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 13 warnings.
[-]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[!]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.
See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define
Please re-review the ported plugins, and move the soundtouch plugin to the main
package (it's used by Totem 3.5.x).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
