https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=854679
Jaroslav Škarvada <jskar...@redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(jskarvad@redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #4 from Jaroslav Škarvada <jskar...@redhat.com> --- Thanks for the review. > Specfile: > - use %global instead of %define > > According to python packaging guidelines, you don't have to define > python_sitelib macro on the first line in the spec. > > - do not use BuildRoot: > > - do not use rm -rf %{buildroot} in install section (unless you intend to > use the package for EPEL) > > - do not use %defattr (unless you intend to use the package for EPEL) > I think I needn't, but I can. Personally I am keeping compatibility with old EPELs everywhere, but currently python-dslib is not compatible thus I also removed it from this package. > - also, I believe there is a typo on line 36: > + rm -f {buildroot}... should probably be rm -f %{buildroot}... > Thanks for the catch, fixed. > Also, rpmlint complains a lot about incorrect fsf addresses: > python-sudsds.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sudsds/transport/https.py > python-sudsds.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sudsds/bindings/__init__.py > python-sudsds.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/sudsds/mx/typer.py > > That should probably be reported and corrected by upstream. > I am going to report this. > Also, instead of calling 'python' directly, use the %{__python} macro. Fixed. New versions: Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/datovka/python-sudsds.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jskarvad/datovka/python-sudsds-1.0-2.fc17.src.rpm -- 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