Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: daap-sharp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190939 ------- Additional Comments From cweyl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-05-09 12:26 EST ------- MUSTS: - rpmlint checks return (devel/i386): [build@zeus result]$ rpmlint daap-sharp-0.3.3-1.i386.rpm E: daap-sharp no-binary E: daap-sharp only-non-binary-in-usr-lib E: daap-sharp script-without-shellbang /usr/lib/daap-sharp/daap-sharp.dll.config W: daap-sharp devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/pkgconfig/daap-sharp.pc [build@zeus result]$ rpmlint daap-sharp-0.3.3-1.src.rpm E: daap-sharp hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib E: daap-sharp hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/%{name} - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (LGPL) OK, matches source, included text in %doc - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream 53feead0f3ef75cf5e34cbb4f1d37f30 daap-sharp-0.3.3.tar.gz 53feead0f3ef75cf5e34cbb4f1d37f30 daap-sharp-0.3.3.tar.gz.srpm - package compiles on devel (i386) BAD: package fails to compile in mock on FC-5/x86_64 (and not ExcludeArch'ed): RPM build errors: File not found: /var/tmp/daap-sharp-0.3.3-1-root-mockbuild/usr/lib/daap-sharp Most likely due to this in %files: %{_prefix}/lib/%{name} Why not use %{_libdir}/%{name} instead? In fact, why not use %{_libdir} everywhere %{_prefix}/lib is used in the spec? - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file BAD: Files used by pkgconfig (.pc files) must be in a -devel package SHOULD: - why not include AUTHORS, ChangeLog, README, etc, in %doc? - why not include the samples in %doc? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review