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=574506 Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |steve.traylen@xxxxxxx AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |steve.traylen@xxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #7 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> 2010-04-23 16:20:21 EDT --- Review: python26-distribute. Date: * PASS: rpmlint output $ rpmlint SPECS/python26-distribute.spec \ SRPMS/python26-distribute-0.6.10-3.el5.src.rpm \ RPMS/noarch/python26-distribute-0.6.10-3.el5.noarch.rpm \ python26-distribute.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.6.10-3 0.6.10-3.el5 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. * PASS: Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. python26-<tarballname> * PASS: spec file name same as base package %{name}. * PASS: Packaging Guidelines. * PASS: Approved license in .spec file. Python or ZPLv2.0 * PASS: License on Source code. zpl.txt and psfl.txt * PASS: Include LICENSE file or similar if it exist. zpl.txt and psfl.txt * PASS: Written in American English. * PASS: Spec file legible. * PASS: Included source must match upstream source. $ md5sum distribute-0.6.10.tar.gz ../SOURCES/distribute-0.6.10.tar.gz 99fb4b3e4ef0861bba11aa1905e89fed distribute-0.6.10.tar.gz 99fb4b3e4ef0861bba11aa1905e89fed ../SOURCES/distribute-0.6.10.tar.gz * PASS: Build on one architecture. * PASS: Not building on an architecture must highlighted. * PASS: Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. * PASS: Handle locales properly. no locales * PASS: ldconfig must be called on shared libs. no libs * PASS: No bundled copies of system libraries. none present * PASS: Package must state why relocatable if relocatable. not relocatalbe. * PASS: A package must own all directories that it creates * PASS: No duplicate files in %files listings. None * PASS: Permissions on files must be set properly. %defattr %defatt present, * PASS: %clean section contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). Present * FAIL: Each package must consistently use macros. See below * PASS: The package must contain code, or permissable content. * PASS: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. No large docs * PASS: %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. * PASS: Header files must be in a -devel package. No headers * PASS: Static libraries must be in a -static package. No libs * PASS: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' None * PASS: Then library files that end in .so None * PASS: devel packages must require the exact base package None * PASS: No .la libtool archives None * PASS: GUI apps should have %{name}.desktop file No Gui * PASS: No files or directories already owned by other packages. None * PASS: %install must run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). It does * PASS: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. They are. Summary: Just one things. The .spec file uses both {buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT which it should not. On a similar but less important you want to replace $RPM_OPT_FLAGS with %{optflags} -- 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