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=701284 --- Comment #2 from HaÃkel GuÃmar <karlthered@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-05-08 11:35:42 EDT --- Preliminary pass: MUST: rpmlint must be run on src.rpm and rpm: KO $ rpmlint -iv python-py2pack-0.3.15-1.fc14.src.rpm python-py2pack.src: I: checking python-py2pack.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dsc -> dc, disc, doc The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. python-py2pack.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changelogs -> change logs, change-logs, changelings The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. python-py2pack.src: I: checking-url http://github.com/saschpe/py2pack (timeout 10 seconds) python-py2pack.src:41: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 11, tab: line 41) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. python-py2pack.src: W: invalid-url Source0: py2pack-0.3.15.tar.gz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. $ rpmlint -iv python-py2pack-0.3.15-1.fc15.noarch.rpm python-py2pack.noarch: I: checking python-py2pack.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dsc -> dc, disc, doc The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. python-py2pack.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US changelogs -> change logs, change-logs, changelings The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. python-py2pack.noarch: I: checking-url http://github.com/saschpe/py2pack (timeout 10 seconds) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Please provide download url in Source field, in your case, that should be: http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz Though not explicitly mandatory, fix the tabs issue, real editors can do that automagically. MUST: package named accordingly to package naming guidelines: OK MUST: spec file name match %{name}: OK MUST: licensed according a Fedora compliant license: OK (GPLv2 - license file included) MUST: License field in spec match actual license: OK MUST: spec in legible american english: OK MUST: sources provided match upstream's OK provided sources md5sum: 8a9aceba034a96cfa9d622971cb697e4 upstream sources md5sum: 8a9aceba034a96cfa9d622971cb697e4 MUST: package sucessfully compiles on at least one primary architecture (all of them: x86 and x86_64 under mock for fedora-devel) MUST: all build dependencies are listed in BR: OK MUST: package does not list a file more than once in %files section: OK MUST: permissions are properly set: OK MUST: package consistenly uses macros: OK MUST: package contains permissable content: OK MUST: all filenames are valid UTF-8: OK SHOULD: the module provided works (tested with python 2.7) Note: does not build on python 3.2 as stated by the reviewee in the spec few remarks: * inconsistent use of macros: %{_mandir} | /usr/man/man1/ %{_docdir} | /usr/share/doc ==> please use the macro choose either $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}. * can you state the reasons why you disabled the %check part ? If you're not planning to fix this, you should at least comment the whole part. * about python3 support bits, what's the current situation ? is it supported upstream or a work-in-progress ? are you working on a patch to fix build issues ? * probably a matter of style, but i'd prefer that you explicitely set permissions for chmod commands (0755 for the scripts). I advise you to do the same for the man pages (0644). -- 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