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=623604 Damian Wrobel <dwrobel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dwrobel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, | |martin.gieseking@xxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Damian Wrobel <dwrobel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-09-18 10:42:16 EDT --- Hi Pavel, I did an un-official(informal) xneur package review, please find some initial comments. As it's my first package review please be understanding if something is not perfect. - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. $ rpmlint xneur-0.9.9-1.fc13.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. OK - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. OK - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. OK - MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK, GPLv2+ - MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. $ grep -B 1 later xneur-0.9.9/COPYING specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free -- the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. NOT OK. The spec says it's GPLv2, but the licens is "or later version" like[1], so the GPLv2+ should be used instead. - MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. OK - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. NOT OK. The summary attempts to compare this program to a different one: "It's program like Punto Switcher, ..." which should be avoided[2]. BTW, for people who don't know what the Punto Switches program is designed for, such a comparison is rather useless. - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. $ spectool xneur.spec | awk '{print $2}' | wget -i - -O - -o /dev/null | md5sum 3c87012e79838fb57220fe71a16546ce $ rpmdev-md5 xneur-0.9.9-1.fc13.src.rpm | grep .tar 3c87012e79838fb57220fe71a16546ce xneur-0.9.9.tar.bz2 OK - MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. NOT OK. It doesn't build for i686 in mock for F-14 and F-15(rawhide) [3]. Please look for: /usr/include/libnotify/notification.h:28:21: fatal error: gtk/gtk.h: No such file or directory compilation terminated. - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. NOT OK. Doesn't build yet. - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. NOT OK. Doesn't build yet. - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden. OK - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. OK - MUST: Packages must NOT OK bundle copies of system libraries. NOT OK. It looks that it the xneur library needs to be packaged separately[4]. - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. OK - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. $ rpm -qlv xneur | grep usr/lib/xneur lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 Sep 15 21:02 /usr/lib/xneur/libxnstatistic.so.0 -> libxnstatistic.so.0.0.0 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 9064 Sep 15 21:02 /usr/lib/xneur/libxnstatistic.so.0.0.0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Sep 15 21:02 /usr/lib/xneur/libxntest.so.0 -> libxntest.so.0.0.0 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 5248 Sep 15 21:02 /usr/lib/xneur/libxntest.so.0.0.0 NOT OK. It looks that the package doesn't own all necessary directories (/usr/lib/xneur)[5]. - MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations) OK - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. OK - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. OK. Just please consider to replace %{_libdir}/xneur/*.so.* with the %{_libdir}/%{name}/*.so.* - MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. OK - MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). OK - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. OK - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. $ rpmls xneur-0.9.9-1.fc13.i686.rpm 2>&1 | grep "\.h" $ OK - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. $rpmls xneur-*-0.9.9-1.fc13.i686.rpm 2>&1 | grep "\.a" $ OK - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. OK - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} OK - MUST: Packages must NOT OK contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. $ rpmls xneur-*-0.9.9-1.fc13.i686.rpm 2>&1 | grep "\.la" $ OK - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. OK - MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. OK References: [1]. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#.22or_later_version.22_licenses [2]. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#summary [3]. http://www.theowned.net/~dw/projects/rpmbuild/BUILD/LOGS/smock-build-xneur-0.9.9-1.log [4]. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_libraries [5]. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories -- 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