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=608069 --- Comment #38 from Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-08-02 17:32:00 EDT --- Yes. Mostly done (included below). I can't build it in koji or rawhide at the moment and it looks like there's no files included in the base package as I don't see a base %files manifest. According to the home page its a library so I would expect (based on C stuff) that there would be an installable library in the base package and devel in the devel files. Other than that there's a few minor minuses below. + rpmlint output $ rpmlint tango.spec tango-0.99.9-9.20100726svn5508.fc13.src.rpm tango.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: tango-20100726svn5508.tar.xz tango.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) runtime -> run time, run-time, runtish tango.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found fr tango.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time, run-time, runtish tango.src: W: spelling-error %description -l fr langage -> language tango.src: W: invalid-url Source0: tango-20100726svn5508.tar.xz 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. + package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines + specfile name matches the package base name + package should satisfy packaging guidelines + license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora + license matches the actual package license + latest version packaged + %doc includes license file + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible upstream sources match sources in the srpm - package successfully builds on at least one architecture tested using koji scratch build + BuildRequires list all build dependencies n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/* n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun does not use Prefix: /usr n/a package owns all directories it creates n/a no duplicate files in %files + Package perserves timestamps on install - Permissions on files must be set properly + %defattr line + consistent use of macros + package must contain code or permissible content n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage + files marked %doc should not affect package runtime + header files should be in -devel + static libraries should be in -static n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig' n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel - devel must require the fully versioned base + packages should not contain libtool .la files n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file + packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages + filenames must be valid UTF-8 Optional: n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream to include it + translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if available - reviewer should build the package in mock/koji - the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures n/a review should test the package functions as described + scriptlets should be sane - non -devel packages should require fully versioned base n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel + shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin n/a Package should have man 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