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=620385 Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |martin.gieseking@xxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #11 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> 2010-09-01 11:02:03 EDT --- Here's the formal review. The package looks good now. Just one thing: Since upstream said the pdf file is licensed under GPLv2, you should reflect that in a License field of the -docs package. Alternatively, ask the developer if he really meant GPLv2, or if GPLv2+ is also OK. In the latter case, you don't need a separate License tag. Maybe he can add a corresponding notice in the pdf file, too. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-13-i386/result/*.rpm BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary complementBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary genomeCoverageBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mergeBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pairToPair BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary groupBy BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fastaFromBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary slopBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bedToIgv BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary overlap BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subtractBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bamToBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary intersectBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary maskFastaFromBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bed12ToBed6 BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bedToBam BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary unionBedGraphs BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sortBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary windowBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary closestBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary linksBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary shuffleBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary coverageBed BEDTools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pairToBed BEDTools.src: W: invalid-url Source1: http://bedtools.googlecode.com/files/BEDTools-User-Manual.v3.pdf HTTP Error 404: Not Found BEDTools.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://bedtools.googlecode.com/files/BEDTools.v2.9.0.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 25 warnings. All above warnings can be ignored: - no manual pages available - invalid URL warnings are false positive --------------------------------- key: [+] 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. [X] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. - add License: GPLv2 to the -docs package [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. - no separate license file available for pdf file => docs package doesn't require a license file [+] 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 BEDTools* 85e66413587f3f1cbb5e9530c20c6d1e BEDTools-User-Manual.v3.pdf 85e66413587f3f1cbb5e9530c20c6d1e BEDTools-User-Manual.v3.pdf.1 a0ac1e63fe4a7ae72e33fd91c24ac3da BEDTools.v2.9.0.tar.gz a0ac1e63fe4a7ae72e33fd91c24ac3da BEDTools.v2.9.0.tar.gz.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared libraries must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] 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: .so files must go in a -devel package. [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) ... [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package. - doc package doesn't require the base package [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin... [X] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. - would be great if upstream could add manual pages for the utilities, but that's optional, of course -- 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