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=464014 Lillian Angel <langel@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review-, | |needinfo?(loganjerry@gmail. | |com) --- Comment #4 from Lillian Angel <langel@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-04 10:54:49 EDT --- * 1 Packaging Guidelines o 1.1 Naming ok o 1.2 Version and Release ok o 1.3 Legal LGPLv2+, ok. XXXX 1.4 No inclusion of pre-built binaries or libraries The lib/*.jars and questionable files should be removed from the zip prior to uploading it. Please recreate the zip. o 1.5 Spec Legibility ok o 1.6 Writing a package from scratch ok o 1.7 Modifying an existing package n/a o 1.8 Architecture Support ok o 1.9 Filesystem Layout ok XXXX 1.10 Use rpmlint see errors below, and fix. o 1.11 Changelogs ok o 1.12 Tags ok o 1.13 BuildRoot tag ok o 1.14 %clean ok XXXX 1.15 Requires Have each on a separate "Requires" line. XXXX 1.16 BuildRequires Have each on a separate "BuildRequires" line. XXXX 1.17 Summary and description Can you shorten the tools description. This is too much information- possibly remove the class names etc. o 1.18 Encoding ok o 1.19 Documentation ok o 1.20 Compiler flags ok o 1.21 Debuginfo packages n/a o 1.22 Devel Packages n/a XXXX 1.23 Requiring Base Package ok, but please put all "Requires" on a separate line o 1.24 Shared Libraries ok o 1.25 Packaging Static Libraries n/a o 1.26 Duplication of system libraries n/a o 1.27 Beware of Rpath n/a o 1.28 Configuration files n/a o 1.29 Initscripts n/a o 1.30 Desktop files n/a o 1.31 Macros ok o 1.32 Handling Locale Files n/a o 1.33 Timestamps n/a o 1.34 Parallel make n/a o 1.35 Scriptlets n/a o 1.36 Conditional dependencies n/a o 1.37 Build packages with separate user accounts ok o 1.38 Relocatable packages ok o 1.39 Code Vs Content ok o 1.40 File and Directory Ownership ok o 1.41 Users and Groups n/a o 1.42 Web Applications n/a o 1.43 Conflicts n/a o 1.44 No External Kernel Modules n/a o 1.45 No Files or Directories under /srv n/a o 1.46 Bundling of multiple projects n/a o 1.47 All patches should have an upstream bug link or comment ok o 1.48 Application Specific Guidelines n/a ============ RPMLINT ================== ant-findbugs.noarch: W: non-standard-group Development/Build Tools The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid. Valid groups are: "Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving", "Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases", "Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering", "Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia", "Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System", "Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers", "Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System", "Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support". findbugs.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/findbugs-1.3.7/doc/manual_ja.xml This file has wrong end-of-line encoding, usually caused by creation or modification on a non-Unix system. It could prevent it from being displayed correctly in some circumstances. findbugs.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/findbugs-1.3.7.jar The META-INF/MANIFEST.MF file in the jar contains a hardcoded Class-Path. These entries do not work with older Java versions and even if they do work, they are inflexible and usually cause nasty surprises. findbugs.src:109: E: hardcoded-library-path in ../../lib/findbugs-tools.jar A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib, /usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}. findbugs.src: W: non-coherent-filename findbugs-1.3.7-2.src.rpm findbugs-1.3.7-2.fc10.src.rpm The file which contains the package should be named <NAME>-<VERSION>-<RELEASE>.<ARCH>.rpm. findbugs-javadoc.noarch: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation The value of the Group tag in the package is not valid. Valid groups are: "Amusements/Games", "Amusements/Graphics", "Applications/Archiving", "Applications/Communications", "Applications/Databases", "Applications/Editors", "Applications/Emulators", "Applications/Engineering", "Applications/File", "Applications/Internet", "Applications/Multimedia", "Applications/Productivity", "Applications/Publishing", "Applications/System", "Applications/Text", "Development/Debug", "Development/Debuggers", "Development/Languages", "Development/Libraries", "Development/System", "Development/Tools", "Documentation", "System Environment/Base", "System Environment/Daemons", "System Environment/Kernel", "System Environment/Libraries", "System Environment/Shells", "User Interface/Desktops", "User Interface/X", "User Interface/X Hardware Support". 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review