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=672203 Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |martin.gieseking@xxxxxx AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |martin.gieseking@xxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> 2011-01-29 07:48:49 EST --- Hi Peter, as far as I see, version 1.0.0 of riak_err hasn't been officially released yet. So this is a snapshot package that should follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages Everything else looks fine. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/*.rpm erlang-riak_err.src: W: invalid-url Source0: basho-riak_err-riak_err-1.0.0-0-g429f757.tar.gz erlang-riak_err.x86_64: E: /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/ erlang-stdlib erlang-riak_err.x86_64: E: no-binary erlang-riak_err.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings. - explicit-lib-dependency is false positive - no-binary is expected in pure Erlang packages - only-non-binary-in-usr-lib is expected in pure Erlang packages --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [X] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. - version 1.0.0 hasn't been released yet, thus this is a snapshot release: update the Release field accordingly [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum basho-riak_err-riak_err-1.0.0-0-g429f757.tar.gz* 94e7567877b306e0f0f13574ae3be8d8 basho-riak_err-riak_err-1.0.0-0-g429f757.tar.gz 94e7567877b306e0f0f13574ae3be8d8 basho-riak_err-riak_err-1.0.0-0-g429f757.tar.gz.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [.] MUST: When compiling C, C++, and Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache must be updated. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [.] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled. [.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information, the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. EPEL <= 5 [+] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field. [+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package must run rm -rf %{buildroot}. [+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. [.] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream,... [+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [.] SHOULD: patch files should be prefixed with %{name}- [.] SHOULD: all patches should be commented in the spec file [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [+] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [.] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. -- 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