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=698681 --- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-04-22 05:17:39 EDT --- REVIEW: Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable - rpmlint is NOT silent work ~: rpmlint Desktop/grilo-* grilo.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pluggable -> plug gable, plug-gable, plugged ^^^ that's ok - just a false positive grilo.src: W: no-url-tag ^^^ Please, add "Url: http://live.gnome.org/Grilo"; line. grilo.src:57: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 57) ^^^ cosmetic grilo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pluggable -> plug gable, plug-gable, plugged ^^^ false positive grilo.x86_64: W: no-url-tag ^^^ see above. grilo.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/grl-inspect ['/usr/lib64'] grilo.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgrlnet-0.1.so.0.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] grilo.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/grilo-test-ui ['/usr/lib64'] grilo.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib64/libgrlnet-0.1.so.0.0.0 grilo.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib64/libgrlnet-0.1.so.0.0.0 grilo.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib64/libgrilo-0.1.so.0.0.0 grilo.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib64/libgrilo-0.1.so.0.0.0 ^^^ This MUST be fixed. Just add the following lines: %post -p /sbin/ldconfig %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig grilo.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary grl-inspect grilo.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary grilo-test-ui ^^ that's ok grilo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-url-tag grilo-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pluggable -> plug gable, plug-gable, plugged grilo-devel.x86_64: W: no-url-tag grilo-vala.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pluggable -> plug gable, plug-gable, plugged ^^^ see above. grilo-vala.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Development/Other ^^^ Please use group value from /usr/share/doc/rpm-*/GROUPS grilo-vala.x86_64: W: no-url-tag 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 13 warnings. work ~: + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (LGPLv2.1 or later). + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum grilo-0.1.15.tar.bz2* 4276337b56f09c3a448a26e0f41a72812b72faa0e4dbdcc9ab1a314e2c5c7264 grilo-0.1.15.tar.bz2 4276337b56f09c3a448a26e0f41a72812b72faa0e4dbdcc9ab1a314e2c5c7264 grilo-0.1.15.tar.bz2.1 sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. See koji link above. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. 0 No need to handle locales. - The package stores shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths, so it MUST call ldconfig in %post and %postun. + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. 0 The package is not designed to be relocatable. + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissible content. 0 No extremely large documentation files. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. + Header files are stored in a -devel package. 0 No static libraries. + The pkgconfig(.pc) files are stored in a -devel package and necessary runtime requirement is picked up automatically. + The library file(s) that end in .so (without suffix) is(are) stored in a -devel package. + The -devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. 0 Not a GUI application. +/- The package owns all directories that it creates but it also owns files or directories already owned by other packages. Well, frankly speaking I'd rather treat this as an issue, but it seems that it's a common situation for GTK-related apps due to their complex mutual relations. Namely these directories have multiple owners: /usr/lib/girepository-1.0/ /usr/share/gir-1.0/ /usr/share/gtk-doc/ /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/ Keeping in mind that we've got a policy about directories, belonging to packages which are not required by your package to function, which explicitly allows us to claim ownership on these. So, please, either ensure that someone in the package's dependency chain owns these directories or explicitly claim ownership on these ones. + At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. -- 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