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=226658 --- Comment #11 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2009-05-28 09:34:10 EDT --- - Instead of make clean'ing in between building the different versions, I'd suggest using off-root builds. ** rpmlint output: xsane.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/xsane-0.996/xsane.CHANGES xsane.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/xsane-0.996/xsane.PROBLEMS xsane.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/xsane-0.996/xsane.INSTALL xsane-gimp.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. - You need to convert these to UTF-8 in the setup phase: for doc in xsane.{CHANGES,PROBLEMS,INSTALL}; do iconv -f ISO-8859-1 -t utf8 $doc -o $doc.new && \ touch -r $doc $doc.new && \ mv $doc.new $doc done MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. OK MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. ~OK - You don't need BR: sed, it is in the standard buildroot. - No need to define desktop_vendor as it is only used in two places and is not even supposed to be changed. 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. OK MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. NEEDSWORK - Package must not own %dir %{_datadir}/applications which is a standard system directory. - gimp package must Requires: gimp for dir ownership and not own %dir %{_sysconfdir}/gimp %dir %{_sysconfdir}/gimp/plugins.d MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. NEEDSWORK - %{_datadir}/sane, %{_datadir}/sane/xsane and %{_datadir}/sane/xsane/xsane-eula.txt are owned by both xsane and xsane-gimp. Is there a good reason for this? If xsane-gimp needs those files, it'd be wiser to let xsane own them and put a Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} to xsane-gimp. MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. NEEDSWORK - Use %defattr(-,root,root,-) instead of %defattr(-,root,root). MUST: Clean section exists. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. NEEDSWORK - Remove unneeded files from doc (rm in setup or install phase): xsane.RPM, xsane.conf, xsane.spec*, xsane.INSTALL, xsane.REMOVE MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A 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: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK -- 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