Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox-32 - Alternate Launcher for 32bit Firefox Alias: firefox-32 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215256 ------- Additional Comments From chris.stone@xxxxxxxxx 2006-11-23 13:50 EST ------- ==== REVIEW CHECKLIST ==== X rpmlint output: E: firefox-32 description-line-too-long If you have both 32bit /usr/lib and 64bit /usr/lib64 Firefox installed, the standard E: firefox-32 description-line-too-long /usr/bin/firefox launcher will run only the 64bit version. This launcher allows you E: firefox-32 description-line-too-long to choose to run the 32bit browser by running /usr/bin/firefox-32. Please be sure W: firefox-32 strange-permission setup-firefox-32.sh 0755 E: firefox-32 hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib E: firefox-32 description-line-too-long If you have both 32bit /usr/lib and 64bit /usr/lib64 Firefox installed, the standard E: firefox-32 description-line-too-long /usr/bin/firefox launcher will run only the 64bit version. This launcher allows you E: firefox-32 description-line-too-long to choose to run the 32bit browser by running /usr/bin/firefox-32. Please be sure E: firefox-32 only-non-binary-in-usr-lib W: firefox-32 no-documentation W: firefox-32 one-line-command-in-%trigger /usr/lib64/firefox-32/setup-firefox-32.sh /tmp/firefox-32-0.0.1-2.fc6.x86_64.rpm.32469/usr/share/applications/firefox-32.desktop: warning: boolean key "Terminal" has value "0", boolean values should be "false" or "true", although "0" and "1" are allowed in this field for backwards compatibility /tmp/firefox-32-0.0.1-2.fc6.x86_64.rpm.32469/usr/share/applications/firefox-32.desktop: error: invalid characters in value of key "StartupNotify", boolean values must be "false" or "true" (found "True") E: firefox-32 invalid-desktopfile /tmp/firefox-32-0.0.1-2.fc6.x86_64.rpm.32469/usr/share/applications/firefox-32.desktop I suggest you remove /usr/lib paths from the description and make sure the lines are < 80 chars. Definately remove the warren togami rant in the description, it does not belong there, let's keep this professional. rpmlint is saying setup-firefox-32.sh should be in /usr/share not /usr/lib64 move this to /usr/share or else add a comment in spec file indicating why it should be in /usr/lib64 Fix desktop files so rpmlint likes them Single line trigger files seem okay to me, not sure why rpmlint warns about them - package named according to package naming guidelines - spec filename matches %{name} - package meets packaging guidelines - package licensed with open source compatible license O spec file matches actual license. I'm assuming since you are both the upstream author and packager this is the case. - license not packaged with source or included in %doc - written in American english - spec file legible O There is no upstream so I cannot verify source match, but since packager *is* upstream this is okay - package successfully compiles and builds on FC6 x86_64 X all build dependencies listed in BR (missing desktop-file-utils for Requires) - no locales - no shared libraries - package is not relocatable X package does not own all directories it creates - no duplicates in %files - file permissions set properly - package contains proper %clean section - macro usage consistent - contains code - no large documentation - no header files or static libraries - no pkgconfig files - package does not require a devel subpackage - does not contain .la files X .desktop file is not installed using desktop-file-install - package does not own files or directories owned by other packages ==== MUST ==== - shorten description to 80 chars in length - remove 2nd paragraph in description, instead place a comment in the spec file pointing to bug #214100 - investigate rpmlint strange permissions warning, consider using 775 instead of rpmlint likes that better - move shell script to /usr/share as rpmlint suggests, or if it must be in /usr/lib64 then add a comment in spec file indicating why - make rpmlint happy with .desktop file - install desktop files with desktop-file-install in %install - packages with .desktop files should Requires: desktop-file-utils - package must own the /usr/lib64/firefox-32/ directory if this is where the .sh files ultimately goes (see rpmlint warning indicating this file should go in /usr/share) ==== SHOULD ==== - remove paths /usr/lib etc. from description, it confuses rpmlint and they are not needed for the description - place comment above Source0 URL indicating that this is a shell script written by packager and there is no web location to find the script - Include copy of GPL license in %doc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review