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=571458 --- Comment #1 from BJ Dierkes <wdierkes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-09-28 20:58:36 EDT --- PASS: rpmlint run on every package: $ rpmlint -i SPECS/sqlite36.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -i /var/lib/mock/epel-5-x86_64/result/sqlite36-3.6.22-2.el5.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -i /var/lib/mock/epel-5-x86_64/result/sqlite36-devel-3.6.22-2.el5.x86_64.rpm sqlite36-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. --- PASS: package is named according to guidelines (exception, multi-version pkg) PASS: spec file name matches base name (sqlite36.spec) --- FAIL: package does not fully meet guidelines reqarding Tcl extensions: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl#Naming_Conventions http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl#arch-specific_packages --- PASS: package is licensed with an approved license (Public Domain) PASS: spec file is written in American English PASS: spec file is legible --- PASS: sources match upstream: Source0: http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite-%{version}.tar.gz Source1: http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite_docs_%{docver}.zip $ curl -s http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite-3.6.22.tar.gz | md5sum ; md5sum SOURCES/sqlite-3.6.22.tar.gz a17bd53f1fde11f84adf79c6a1510ce5 - a17bd53f1fde11f84adf79c6a1510ce5 SOURCES/sqlite-3.6.22.tar.gz $ curl -s http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite_docs_3_6_22.zip | md5sum ; md5sum SOURCES/sqlite_docs_3_6_22.zip 665889e9de50136514aa267173066e96 - 665889e9de50136514aa267173066e96 SOURCES/sqlite_docs_3_6_22.zip --- PASS: package successfully compiles on atleast one primary arch (el5-x86_64) PASS: all build dependencies are listed PASS: spec file handles locales properly (no locale files) PASS: ldconfig is called in %post/%postun PASS: package does not bundle copes of system libraries PASS: package owns all directories it creates (none) PASS: files are not listed more than once PASS: permissions on files are set properly PASS: header files are in -devel PASS: doc files are in -doc PASS: no static files to package in -static PASS: library files are packages under base, .so without suffix under -devel PASS: -devel package requires base package PASS: package does not include any .la/.a files PASS: package does not own files/directories already owned by other packages PASS: all file names are UTF-8 --- ????: license file not included in source, should request upstream include it. PASS: the package builds in mock PASS: software functions as expected (calling sqlite36) ????: -doc sub package does not require base package PASS: pkgconfig files are packages under -devel --- Summary: Looks mostly good: FAIL: package does not fully meet guidelines reqarding Tcl extensions. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl#Naming_Conventions http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl#arch-specific_packages ????: License file is not included in source... SHOULD request that upstream includes it. ????: The -doc subpackage doesn't require the base package. Up to you if you want to change that, its not a MUST. -- 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