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=739798 Frank Ch. Eigler <f...@redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |needinfo?(mgoodwin@redhat.c | |om) --- Comment #2 from Frank Ch. Eigler <f...@redhat.com> 2011-11-14 11:42:35 EST --- FAIL MUST: rpmlint, tested on F15 x86-64 build: [root@very]~/rpmbuild# rpmlint SRPMS/pcp-gui-1.5.1-1.fc15.src.rpm [1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [[root@very]~/rpmbuild# rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/pcp-* [pcp-gui.x86_64: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/man/man1 [pcp-gui.x86_64: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /var/lib [pcp-gui.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/libexec/pcp/bin/pmsnap [pcp-gui-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/pcp-gui-1.5.1/src/chart/main.cpp [pcp-gui-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/pcp-gui-1.5.1/src/chart/pmchart.cpp [pcp-gui-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/pcp-gui-1.5.1/src/chart/namespace.cpp [3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 0 warnings. PASS MUST: The spec file name must match the base package. FAIL MUST: No gross violations of Packaging:Guidelines seen. Minor stuff: run desktop-file-install on pmchart.desktop. PASS MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license PASS MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. (COPYING file includes all licenses). PASS MUST: [License file included in %doc] PASS MUST: The spec file must be written in American English PASS MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible PASS MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source PASS MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms PASS MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture -- none found PASS MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, PASS MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly -- package not i18n'd PASS MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files -- none PASS MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. PASS MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact PASS MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. PASS MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. PASS MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly -- no gross errors seen PASS MUST: MUST: Each package must consistently use macros -- minimal use PASS MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content PASS MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. NB: it's named pcp-doc rather than pcp-gui-doc. PASS MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. -- apparently PASS MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package -- none PASS MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. PASS MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1) -> -devel -- none PASS MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require [...] - none PASS MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool FAIL MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, Package's pmchart.desktop needs to be desktop-file-install'd FAIL MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. Same as rpmlint errors at top. PASS MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. OK SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) [...] OK SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations -- n/a KO SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock -- tested on f15 native system only KO SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures OK SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. -- smoke-tested OK SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane -- no scriptlets OK SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency NB: pcp-gui & pcp-doc subpackage not mutually required OK SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends -- none OK SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside -- no /file dependencies OK SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts -- includes 8 man pages in main package Bottom line, looks good except for rpmlint errors, and missing desktop-file-install. -- 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
