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=517183 --- Comment #7 from Jarod Wilson <jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-17 16:13:09 EDT --- Okay, per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines ... * MUST: rpmlint -- only 1 warning, can be ignored $ rpmlint mipv6-daemon* mipv6-daemon.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name mip6d ('mipv6-daemon', 'mipv6-daemond') 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. * MUST: package name -- looks fine. typically, it should match the tarball name, but the -umip portion appears to be simply designating this as the usagi implementation of mobile ipv6. Perhaps it would be worth noting this in the %description field though, just so its clear. (though if this is the *only* implementation, then its sort of implied, I guess). * MUST: spec name matches -- ok * MUST: package meets packaging guidelines -- ok * MUST: license -- GPLv2, ok * MUST: license matches source -- ok * MUST: included license text installed w/pkg -- ok * MUST: spec in American English -- ok * MUST: spec legible -- ok * MUST: sources match upstream -- ok a8ebeb4f41ceed71037d0f5596ccc11d mipv6-daemon-umip-0.4.tar.gz a8ebeb4f41ceed71037d0f5596ccc11d mipv6-daemon-umip-0.4.tar.gz.1 * MUST: compile on at least one primary arch -- NEEDSWORK. I just gave this a shot in a rawhide x86_64 chroot, and the build failed. However, its simply a missing 'BuildRequires: indent', and then it builds fine. * MUST: ExcludeArch stuff -- n/a * MUST: build deps -- NEEDSWORK, see above re: indent. * MUST: locales -- n/a * MUST: ldconfig scriptlet -- n/a * MUST: own created directories -- ok * MUST: no multiple listings of a file -- ok * MUST: permissions -- ok * MUST: %clean rm -rf -- ok * MUST: macro consistency -- ok * MUST: pkg contains code -- ok * MUST: large docs in -doc sub-pkg -- n/a * MUST: %doc bits not used at runtime -- ok * MUST: header files -- n/a * MUST: static libs -- n/a * MUST: pkgconfig files -- n/a * MUST: libs w/suffix -- n/a * MUST: -devel req. main pkg -- n/a * MUST: libtool droppings -- n/a * MUST: gui .desktop file -- n/a * MUST: doesn't own other packages dirs -- ok * MUST: %install rm -rf -- ok * MUST: filenames valid UTF-8 -- ok * SHOULD: upstream need license? -- n/a * SHOULD: description/summary translations -- n/a * SHOULD: builds in mock -- NEEDSWORK (just the missing BR: indent) * SHOULD: builds on all arches -- unknown * SHOULD: functions as it should -- unknown (I don't have the time or knowledge at the moment for functional testing, assuming packager has tested) * SHOULD: scriptlets are sane -- ok * SHOULD: subpkg reqs -- n/a * SHOULD: pkgconfig files -- n/a * SHOULD: file requires -- n/a Basically, just add the missing BuildRequires: indent (or just tack it onto the end of the line with flex and bison), and this package is good to go. -- 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