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=659896 --- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2010-12-06 09:05:56 EST --- rpmlint output: cp2k.x86_64: W: no-documentation cp2k.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary cp2k.sopt cp2k-smp.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) multi -> mulch, mufti cp2k-smp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti cp2k-smp.x86_64: W: no-documentation cp2k-smp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary cp2k.ssmp 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. OK MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. OK - Although I would prefer if Patch0 was split in pieces. MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK - Source code has no license headers, but GPLv2+ license is specified clearly in COPYRIGHT and src/cp2k_info.F MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK e46efdeb7230cb762245619a1d275e03 cp2k-2_1-branch.tar.gz e46efdeb7230cb762245619a1d275e03 ../SOURCES/cp2k-2_1-branch.tar.gz MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. OK MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK - doc directory contains some large PDFs, but they are not very relevant to the operation of the package and are not shipped. MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. NEEDSWORK SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK EPEL: Clean section exists. OK EPEL: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK EPEL: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A -- 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