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=516536 Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> 2010-03-27 16:57:36 EDT --- Review: globus-gram-job-manager Date: Mar 27th 2010 Mock Build: Okay in F14-x86_64. * YES: rpmlint output $ rpmlint SPECS/globus-gram-job-manager.spec \ SRPMS/globus-gram-job-manager-10.17-1.fc12.src.rpm \ RPMS/x86_64/globus-gram-job-manager-10.17-1.fc12.x86_64.rpm \ RPMS/x86_64/globus-gram-job-manager-debuginfo-10.17-1.fc12.x86_64.rpm \ RPMS/noarch/globus-gram-job-manager-doc-10.17-1.fc12.noarch.rpm SPECS/globus-gram-job-manager.spec: W: invalid-url Source1: globus_gram_job_manager_setup-4.3.tar.gz SPECS/globus-gram-job-manager.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: globus_gram_job_manager-10.17.tar.gz globus-gram-job-manager.src: W: invalid-url Source1: globus_gram_job_manager_setup-4.3.tar.gz globus-gram-job-manager.src: W: invalid-url Source0: globus_gram_job_manager-10.17.tar.gz which is all to be expected. * YES: Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. globus guidelines. * YES: spec file name same as base package %{name}. globus guidelines. * YES: Packaging Guidelines. globus guidelines. * YES: Approved license in .spec file. ASL2.0 * YES: License on Source code. YES, clear licensing. * YES: Include LICENSE file or similar if it exist. GLOBUS_LICENSE * YES: Written in American English. * YES: Spec file legible. * YES: Included source must match upstream source. $ diff -r --brief gt5.0.0-all-source-installer/source-trees/gram/jobmanager/source \ ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/globus_gram_job_manager-10.17 Only in /home/steve/rpmbuild/SOURCES/globus_gram_job_manager-10.17: GLOBUS_LICENSE which is to be expected. * YES: Build on one architecture. * YES: Not building on an architecture must highlighted. Not checked. * YES: Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. * YES: Handle locales properly. * YES: ldconfig must be called on shared libs. * YES: No bundled copies of system libraries. * YES: Package must state why relocatable if relocatable. * YES: A package must own all directories that it creates * YES: No duplicate files in %files listings. * YES: Permissions on files must be set properly. %defattr * YES: %clean section contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). * YES: Each package must consistently use macros. * YES: The package must contain code, or permissable content. * YES: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. * YES: %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. * YES: Header files must be in a -devel package. * YES: Static libraries must be in a -static package. * YES: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' * YES: Then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. * YES: devel packages must require the exact base package * YES: No .la libtool archives * YES: GUI apps should have %{name}.desktop file * YES: No files or directories already owned by other packages. * YES: %install must run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). * YES: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. APPROVED. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review