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=529831 --- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-28 12:15:46 EDT --- Ok, the package's spec file based on our good old spec-file for OpenSER, so it's in a good shape already. Koji scratchbuilds for F-11 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1774672 (builds fine) and for EL-5: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1774682 (failed to resolve dependency on libmemcached-devel ) Sources, used to build package, are matching the upstream ones: [petro@Sulaco SOURCES]$ sha256sum opensips-1.6.0-tls_src.tar.gz* 243b18c1160642355b72cd7279b7c282e24592497276c400d72f14b61a1ae5ba opensips-1.6.0-tls_src.tar.gz 243b18c1160642355b72cd7279b7c282e24592497276c400d72f14b61a1ae5ba opensips-1.6.0-tls_src.tar.gz.1 [petro@Sulaco SOURCES]$ Ok, here is my REVIEW: - rpmlint is not silent: [petro@Workplace tmp]$ rpmlint * opensips.i586: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/opensips 0750 opensips.i586: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/opensips/tls/rootCA/certs 0750 opensips.i586: E: non-readable /etc/opensips/osipsconsolerc 0640 opensips.i586: E: non-readable /etc/opensips/opensipsctlrc 0640 opensips.i586: E: non-readable /etc/opensips/opensips.cfg 0640 opensips.i586: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/opensips/tls/rootCA/private 0750 opensips.i586: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/opensips/tls/user 0750 opensips.i586: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/opensips/tls 0750 opensips.i586: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/opensips/tls/rootCA 0750 opensips.i586: E: malformed-line-in-lsb-comment-block # SIP (RFC3261) server. opensips.i586: W: missing-lsb-keyword Required-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/opensips opensips.i586: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/opensips opensips-memcached.i586: W: summary-not-capitalized memcached connector opensips-presence_xcapdiff.i586: W: no-documentation 41 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 10 errors, 4 warnings. [petro@Workplace tmp]$ We may ignore non-standard-dir-perm and non-readable messages - we do want to hide the contents of affected files and directories from strangers. Also, we may ignore no-documentation message, but I'm sure, you should fix malformed-line-in-lsb-comment-block and summary-not-capitalized, at least. + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec . + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines . + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines . + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. - The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, must be included in %doc. + The spec file must be written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source. + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. + The package owns all directories that it creates. + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissible content. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. So, please * fix rpmling messages * add COPYING to %doc (also consider adding CREDITS) and I'll continue. -- 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