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=591982 Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |martin.gieseking@xxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> 2010-05-27 15:23:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > AFAIK there is no need to select a python version. batti should build both with > python 2 and 3 so I prefer to make the switch when Fedora finally switches. > This is easier with a simple "python-devel". OK, that's fine. Here's the formal review. I couldn't find any further issues needed to be addressed. The package looks fine and works as expected. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-13-x86_64/result/batti-*.rpm batti.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US batterymon -> battery, batterer, batter batti.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US un -> UN, nu, in batti.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://batti-gtk.googlecode.com/ IncompleteRead(0 bytes read) batti.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US batterymon -> battery, batterer, batter batti.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US un -> UN, nu, in batti.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://batti-gtk.googlecode.com/ IncompleteRead(0 bytes read) batti.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://batti-gtk.googlecode.com/files/batti-0.3.7.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. All warnings are false positive (URLs are valid, spelling is correct) --------------------------------- keys used in following checklist: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. - GPLv2+ according to source file headers [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. - file COPYING present in %doc [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum batti-0.3.7.tar.gz* f855b28e4bb84fb33565d2668c33e221 batti-0.3.7.tar.gz f855b28e4bb84fb33565d2668c33e221 batti-0.3.7.tar.gz.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. - noarch package - builds correctly for F-12, F-13 and rawhide [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files ... - no shared libs [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix ... - no libs [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package. - no devel package [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. - no .la files [+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file. - .desktop file present and valid [+] .desktop file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [+] MUST: Python eggs must be built from source. [+] MUST: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [+] MUST: If egg-info files are generated by the modules build scripts they must be included in the package. [.] MUST: When building a compat package, ... [.] MUST: When building multiple versions (for a compat package) ... [+] MUST: The gtk icon cache must be updated properly. [.] SHOULD: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) ... [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. - builds in mock [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. - noarch package [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. - seems to work as expected on my notebook [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: subpackages other than devel should require the base package. - no subpackages [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. ---------------- Package 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