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=667208 Martin Gieseking <martin.giesek...@uos.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org |martin.giesek...@uos.de Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Martin Gieseking <martin.giesek...@uos.de> 2011-02-21 12:53:46 EST --- The package looks fine now. It builds and works properly. According to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net, "project" should be removed from the Source0 URL. However, it also works as it is now. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/*.rpm fbg2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fbg2 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. The warning is expected and can be ignored (no manpage available). --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. - application: GPLv2+ - graphics and sound: CC-BY-SA [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum fbg2-0.3.tar.gz* 548a63b729ed7c20da98389f4f3611bf fbg2-0.3.tar.gz 548a63b729ed7c20da98389f4f3611bf fbg2-0.3.tar.gz.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache must be updated. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), ... [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file. [+] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, ... [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [.] 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. [.] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. ---------------- Package APPROVED ---------------- -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
