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: rss-glx -- Really Slick Screensavers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188574 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-05-23 00:39 EST ------- Thanks; your method for generating the fixed tarball is quite nice. You might consider being a bit more descriptive in %description. Perhaps something like: A port of the Really Slick Screensavers to GLX. Provides several visually impressive and graphically intensive screensavers. Note that this package contains only the display hacks themselves; you will need to install the appropriate subpackage for your desktop environment in order to use them as screensavers. (Or whatever; I'm making this up on the spot. The point is that people won't understand what is meant by "contains only the hacks themselves".) The permissions on rss-glx-rm-matrixview.sh are 0775, which is a bit odd (and rpmlint complains about it). Executable documentation is generally frowned upon and rpmlint also complains about it (because your documentation pulls in an additional /bin/bash dependency). I would recommend just installing it 0644 and leave it at that. Other rpmlint warnings are bogus as previously addressed. Is there any reason to package rss-glx_install.pl? This pulls in an odd perl(strict) dependency but not a plain perl dependency, which looks a bit odd. (I know perl provides perl(strict), but perl probably shouldn't be needed at all.) You use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in some places and %buildroot in others. The packaging guidelines require one or the other to be used consistently. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. X specfile is properly named and is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. O source files don't match upsteam due to removal of unacceptable content. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). X rpmlint complains about the executable rm-matrixview script. ? final provides are fine; requires are a bit odd: rss-glx = 0.8.1-0.3.fc6 - /bin/bash /usr/bin/env libGL.so.1()(64bit) libGLU.so.1()(64bit) libICE.so.6()(64bit) libSM.so.6()(64bit) libX11.so.6()(64bit) libalut.so.0()(64bit) libbz2.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libopenal.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) ? perl(strict) * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. X file permissions are appropriate (ok except for mode 770 rss-glx-rm-matrixview.sh * %clean is present * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. O not a GUI app. (Well, sort of; special desktop files for each environment are included, but the hacks aren't indended to be run directly.) -- 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