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=491758 Thomas Sailer <t.sailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |t.sailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #4 from Thomas Sailer <t.sailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-17 09:24:57 EDT --- Fedora review mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11.src.rpm 2008-04-17 Another scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1303992 rpmlint output: $ rpmlint mingw32-opensc-0.11.7-2.fc12.src.rpm mingw32-opensc-0.11.7-2.fc12.noarch.rpm mingw32-opensc.spec mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: file-in-usr-marked-as-conffile /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/etc/opensc.conf mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/sbin/opensc-install.bat mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/sbin/opensc-install.bat mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/bin/cardos-info.bat mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/bin/cardos-info.bat 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 0 warnings. As per Packaging/MinGW, these errors can be ignored (counting .bat files as "windows executables"). + OK ! needs attention + rpmlint output + Package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines + Specfile name matches the package base name + Package follows the Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines + License meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora LGPLv2+ + License matches the actual package license It is also the same as in the corresponding Fedora libxml++ package + The package contains the license file (COPYING) + Spec file is written in American English + Spec file is legible + Upstream sources match sources in the srpm 419e9be372c2f9bbb3ce9704c929d5ec opensc-0.11.7.tar.gz 419e9be372c2f9bbb3ce9704c929d5ec ../SOURCES/opensc-0.11.7.tar.gz n/a Package builds in mock n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed + BuildRequires list all build dependencies n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/* n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun + Does not use Prefix: /usr + Package owns all directories it creates + No duplicate files in %files + %files has %defattr + %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT + Consistent use of macros + Package must contain code or permissible content n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage + Files marked %doc should not affect package n/a Header files should be in -devel Fedora MinGW guidelines allow headers in main package n/a Static libraries should be in -static + Packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig' n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base n/a Packages should not contain libtool .la files Fedora MinGW guidelines allow .la files n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file + Packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages + %install begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT + Filenames must be valid UTF-8 ! use %global instead of %define -- 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