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=620862 --- Comment #10 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> 2010-08-05 10:00:06 EDT --- Hi, Yes the .spec is looking much more familiar and obvious now. - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines Yes. - Spec file matches base package name. Yes. python-newt_syrop. - Spec has consistant macro usage. Yes. - Meets Packaging Guidelines. Yes. - License Yes. LGPLv2 - License field in spec matches NO. The license is LGPLv2+ - License file included in package COPYING FILE is there - Spec in American English Yes - Spec is legible. Yes - Sources match upstream md5sum: No They don't - Package needs ExcludeArch It does not. - BuildRequires correct It is. - Spec handles locales/find_lang No langs present. - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. Not relocatable. - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. It does. - Package has a correct %clean section. It does. - Package has correct buildroot %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) It does though not really needed these days. - Package is code or permissible content. Yes - Doc subpackage needed/used. No large docs present. - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. It will run. - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. No header files. - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun No librarires. - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig No pkgconfig files. - .so files in -devel subpackage. No .so files. - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} Not applicable. - .la files are removed. Not applicable. - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file No gui - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. Yes on mine. - Package has no duplicate files in %files. None. - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. It does not - Package owns all the directories it creates. Yes : /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/newt_syrup /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/newt_syrup-0.1.0-py2.6.egg-info - No rpmlint output. $ rpmlint python-newt_syrup.spec ../SRPMS/python-newt_syrup-0.1.0-4.fc13.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/python-newt_syrup-0.1.0-4.fc13.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint clean. - final provides and requires are sane: requires: newt >= 0.52.11 python(abi) = 2.6 provides: python-newt_syrup = 0.1.0-4.fc13 SHOULD Items: Issues: 1. The license is I believe LGPLv2+ rather than LGPLv2 2. Sources don't match: $ rpm -Uvh http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-newt_syrup-0.1.0-4.fc13.src.rpm Retrieving http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-newt_syrup-0.1.0-4.fc13.src.rpm [steve@bottom SPECS]$ md5sum ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/newt_syrup-0.1.0.tar.gz 8b4292dcc6f259043c27eebfabaf233b /home/steve/rpmbuild/SOURCES/newt_syrup-0.1.0.tar.gz But: $ wget http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/newt_syrup-0.1.0.tar.gz --2010-08-05 15:54:12-- http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/newt_syrup-0.1.0.tar.gz Resolving mcpierce.fedorapeople.org... 128.197.185.45 Connecting to mcpierce.fedorapeople.org|128.197.185.45|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 22042 (22K) [application/x-gzip] Saving to: “newt_syrup-0.1.0.tar.gz” 100%[=============================================>] 22,042 78.4K/s in 0.3s 2010-08-05 15:54:12 (78.4 KB/s) - “newt_syrup-0.1.0.tar.gz” saved [22042/22042] [steve@bottom SPECS]$ md5sum newt_syrup-0.1.0.tar.gz 712e128eb955d56f242e57cdd6f414e1 newt_syrup-0.1.0.tar.gz [steve@bottom SPECS]$ 8b4292dcc6f259043c27eebfabaf233b != 712e128eb955d56f242e57cdd6f414e1 So other than the source matching looking good. Steve. -- 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