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=561470 --- Comment #24 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-05-02 18:46:52 EDT --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (GPLv2) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. See below - Sources match upstream md5sum: 5e5ee854add958ce30746a15b9d7e713 beakerlib-1.2.tar.gz ae18ea068c48e82196ff6cd381e663d9 beakerlib-1.2.tar.gz.orig OK - BuildRequires correct See below - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) See below - No rpmlint output. See below - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. Source doesn't match from upstream: 5e5ee854add958ce30746a15b9d7e713 beakerlib-1.2.tar.gz ae18ea068c48e82196ff6cd381e663d9 beakerlib-1.2.tar.gz.orig 2. rpmlint says: Probibly all these should be chmod 644 or have a #!/bin/sh added if they should be called stand alone: beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/analyze.sh beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/beakerlib.sh beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/dictionary.vim beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/infrastructure.sh beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/journal.sh beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/logging.sh beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/performance.sh beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/rpms.sh beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/testing.sh beakerlib.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/beakerlib/virtualX.sh This can be ignored, but it would be nice to have man pages for these: beakerlib.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary beakerlib-deja-summarize beakerlib.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary beakerlib-journalcmp beakerlib.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary beakerlib-journalling beakerlib.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary beakerlib-rlMemAvg beakerlib.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary beakerlib-rlMemPeak All these should be mode 644: beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/beakerlib-1.2/LICENSE beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-analyze.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-beakerlib.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-infrastructure.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-journal.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-logging.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-performance.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-rpms.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-testing.1.gz beakerlib.noarch: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/beakerlib-virtualX.1.gz 3. Shouldn't this have a 'Requires: python2' ? 4. Should you add the examples as %doc files? -- 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