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=226346 --- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2009-04-10 01:36:53 EDT --- rpmlint output: python-pyblock.src: W: no-url-tag python-pyblock.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libbdevid python-pyblock.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libbdevid-python python-pyblock.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libselinux python-pyblock.x86_64: W: no-url-tag python-pyblock-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-url-tag 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 3 warnings. [jzlehtol@politzer result]$ less build.log - The source url disclaimer must be added http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#We_are_Upstream - Explicit lib dependencies are probably what you would expect for this package, so that's OK. - The %files sections is a bit too complicated, since the following does the same thing: %files %defattr(-,root,root) /%{python_sitelib}/block/ %{_docdir}/pyblock-%{version}/ - Moreover, I don't like that the docdir is not /usr/share/doc/python-pyblock-version. What I'd do is put mv ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/%{_docdir}/pyblock-%{version} doc after 'make install' and then list the documentation in %files as %doc doc/* - Change the %define's into %global's. *** MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. ~OK MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. OK MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. NEEDSFIX - %{optflags} are not respected!! - Add the definition %{!?pyver: %global pyver %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print sys.version[:3]")} and build with make CFLAGS="%{optflags} -I/usr/include/python%{pyver} -fPIC" %{?_smp_mflags} which also enables SMP make. MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. OK MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. OK MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK MUST: Clean section exists. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. OK MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. OK MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. OK MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files ending in .so must go in a -devel package. OK MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. OK MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. OK MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. NEEDSFIX? - GPLv2 is included, GPLv3 is not. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review