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=668197 --- Comment #2 from Ondrej Vasik <ovasik@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-01-10 09:29:58 EST --- formal review is here, see the notes explaining OK* and BAD statuses below: N/A source files match upstream: can't be checked, as there is no public upstream url for sources download it's quite common in the case of intel packages in early life. Just for reference, sha1sums of checked components: $ sha256sum ledctl.spec 01ef25293aaf5dd83f499a86f8c8d83ae6816eaf5f7a0f6884d15f14b2669dcd ledctl.spec $ sha256sum ledctl-0.1.tgz 209a5430ffb166de65e9949f196e05be8da4937150997f1e509e27bd9ab601ec ledctl-0.1.tgz $ sha256sum ledctl-0.1-1.src.rpm ee2d3db2c4e781a3423fc0e8e66206e837ee29e8a3484b234d5b51e51df9af53 ledctl-0.1-1.src.rpm OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines. OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. OK dist tag is present. OK license field matches the actual license. GPLv2+ OK license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. GPLv2+ OK latest version is being packaged. OK BuildRequires are proper. pod2man required for manpage generating, so BuildRequires: perl could be added for safety, however - perl is part of dependency tree of the basic buildtree so not required. MAYBE compiler flags are appropriate. make CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS --std=c99" - original Makefile uses hardcoded CFLAGS=-O0 -g -Wall -std=c99 - maybe you should remove this definition from Makefile if you want to use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/i686). OK debuginfo package looks complete. BAD rpmlint is silent. $ rpmlint ledctl.spec ledctl*.rpm ledctl.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: whoknows.com/ledctl-0.1.tgz ledctl-debuginfo.i686: W: no-url-tag ledctl.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US LEDs -> LED, LED's, LED s ledctl.i686: W: no-url-tag ledctl.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US LEDs -> LED, LED's, LED s ledctl.src: W: no-url-tag ledctl.src: W: invalid-url Source0: whoknows.com/ledctl-0.1.tgz 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. Please, do not use whoknows.com in Source0 - it will produce errors in the mass checks. I would prefer comment in spec (explaining why there is no upstream URL and tarball download place) OK final provides and requires look sane. N/A %check is present and all tests pass. N/A shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths with proper scriptlets OK owns the directories it creates. OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. OK no duplicates in %files. OK file permissions are appropriate. OK correct scriptlets present. OK code, not content. OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. OK headers in -devel OK pkgconfig files in -devel OK no libtool .la droppings. OK not a GUI app. Summary: Change the Source0 - no whoknows.com please. Add explanation to the spec file. I can confirm there is no Intel Enclosure LED utilities product at http://downloadcenter.intel.com/default.aspx at the moment, however URL could at least point to Intel pages. Consider this CFLAGS change. Please resubmit the spec file and srpm and I'll check the "bad things" before I'll approve this package review. -- 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