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=519074 --- Comment #1 from Dominic Hopf <dmaphy@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-29 08:14:01 EDT --- $ rpmlint fakeroot-ng.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint fakeroot-ng-0.17-0.1.fc11.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint fakeroot-ng-0.17-0.1.fc11.x86_64.rpm fakeroot-ng-debuginfo-0.17-0.1.fc11.x86_64.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. MUSTs ----- OK: package is named according to the package naming guidelines OK: specfile name matches %{name}.spec OK: package seems to meet packaging guidelines OK: license in specfile matches actual license and meets licensing guidelines NOT OK: license file is included in %doc OK: specfile is written in AE OK: specfile is legible OK: sourcefile in the package is the same as provided in the mentioned source, md5sum fits NOT OK: package compiles successfully the package does not compile for ppc64. See http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1642634 Possible solutions: Patch the configure script yourself and/or report this issue to upstream. You can temporarily work around this with 'ExcludeArch: ppc64' to get through the build system, but please note that this is really just a workaround and no solution N/A: all build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires there are no build dependencies N/A: package handles locales properly there are no locales installed with this package N/A: call ldconfig in %post and %postun there is no binary installed with this package OK: package is not designed to be relocatable OK: package owns directorys it creates OK: does not list a file more than once in the %files listing OK: %files section includes %defattr and permissions are set properly OK: %clean section is there and contains rm -rf %{buildroot} OK: macros are consistently used OK: package contains code N/A: subpackage for large documentation files there are no large documentation files OK: program runs properly without files listed in %doc N/A: header files are in a -devel package there are no header files installed with this package N/A: static libraries are in a -static package there are no static libs installed with this package N/A: require pkgconfig if package contains a pkgconfig(.pc) there is no pkgconfig file N/A: put .so-files into -devel package if there are library files with suffix there is no library with suffix, in fact there isn't any library N/A: devel package includes fully versioned dependency for the base package there is no devel package N/A: any libtool archives are removed there are no libtool archives N/A: contains desktop file if it is a GUI application this is a command line application OK: package does not own any files or directories owned by other packages OK: buildroot is removed at beginning of %install N/A: filenames are encoded in UTF-8 not necessary since there are no non-ASCII filenames SHOULD ------ N/A: non-English translations for description and summary there are no other languages supported by this package, in fact it does not provide any localization. I assume localizations are not needed for this package. OK: package builds in mock NOT OK: package builds into binary rpms for all supported architectures see above N/A: program runs I did not test myself if the program works as it should N/A: subpackages contain fully versioned dependency for the base package there are no subpackages N/A: pkgconfig file is placed in a devel package there is no pkgconfig file N/A: require package providing a file instead of the file itself no files outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin are required - I would recommend to use the %{version} tag in Source, since this makes maintenance work easier - the CFLAGS parameter for make is missing in %build section - there is a %doc without any following files in one line - the license file (COPYING) is missing in the %files section - please also add AUTHORS, ChangeLog, INSTALL, NEWS, README and README.porting to the %files-section and tag them as %doc - the header files (*.h) are missing a licensing hint, it would also be nice to see one there. Please report this to upstream -- 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