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=489751 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(lemenkov@xxxxxxxx | |m) | --- Comment #6 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-17 11:16:15 EDT --- Please, fix - use full patch for Source0. REVIEW: - rpmlint is not silent: [petro@host-12-116 Desktop]$ rpmlint btanks-*rpm btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libclunk.so btanks.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libclunk.so exit@xxxxxxxxx btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libsdlx.so btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libbt.so btanks.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libbt.so exit@xxxxxxxxx btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libmrt.so btanks-data.i386: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. [petro@host-12-116 Desktop]$ + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines . + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines . + The License field in the package spec file matchуы the actual license. + The text of the license(s) is included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [petro@host-12-116 Desktop]$ md5sum btanks-0.8.7686.tar.bz2* f5e4076e8562f4ad54fefeceaa37870d btanks-0.8.7686.tar.bz2 f5e4076e8562f4ad54fefeceaa37870d btanks-0.8.7686.tar.bz2.from_srpm [petro@host-12-116 Desktop]$ + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. + The package calls ldconfig in %post and %postun. + A package owns all directories that it creates. + Doesn't contain files, listed more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissable content. + No large documentation files + Everything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. + No header files + No static libraries + No pkgconfig(.pc) files + The package does not contain any .la libtool archives + The package includes a %{name}.desktop file - The %{name}.desktop file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [25] + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. Ok, here are my final notes: * please fix Source0, * fix spec to properly install desktop-file * please, comment the above rpmlint 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