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=693950 Volker Fröhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #17 from Volker Fröhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> 2011-08-19 19:56:59 EDT --- ==================== ===== APPROVED ===== ==================== Comment: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache The sample scriptlets use absolute paths to the binaries. You may opt to do that as well. --------------------- Review: [+] Good [-] Needs work [0] Does not apply MUST: ===== [+] rpmlint: [makerpm@fedora15 rpmbuild]$ rpmlint SRPMS/yagf-0.8.6-6.fc15.src.rpm RPMS/x86_64/yagf-*0.8.6-6.fc15.x86_64.rpm yagf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preprocessing -> reprocessing, p reprocessing, teleprocessing yagf.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preprocessing -> reprocessing, p reprocessing, teleprocessing yagf.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary yagf 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. No additional findings with rpmlint on the installed package. [+] Naming according to the Package Naming Guidelines [+] Spec file matches base package name [+] Packaging guidelines met [+] License approved for Fedora [+] License field in spec matches code [+] License file included, if source package includes it [+] Spec in American English [+] Spec is legible [+] Sources match upstream md5sum: 16582668d9ae34567c4f159c3208bfca [+] Compiles and builds into binary RPMs on at least one primary architecture: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3287672 [0] ExcludeArch is specified and commented [+] Locales are handled correctly [+] All build dependencies listed [0] Calls ldconfig for its shared libraries [+] No bundled system libraries [0] Stated as relocatable package [+] Owns all its directories or requires package that does [+] No file listing duplicates [+] File permissions correct [+] Consistent use of macros [+] Code or permissible content [0] Large documentation in -doc subpackage [+] No runtime dependency of files listed as %doc [0] Header files in -devel subpackage [0] Static files in -static subpackage [0] Library files without suffix in -devel subpackage [0] Devel-package requires base package [0] No .la libtool archives [+] GUI application includes properly installed %{name}.desktop file [+] No files or directories owned, that other packages own [+] Filenames in packages are UTF-8 [0] When building a compat package, it must install using easy_install -m so it won't conflict with the main package. [0] When building multiple versions (for a compat package) one of the packages must contain a default version that is usable via "import MODULE" with no prior setup. SHOULD: ======= [0] Query upstream if no license text is included [+] Package builds in mock: fedora-rawhide-x86_64, fedora-16-i386, fedora-15-x86_64 [+] Package works as described -- I played around a little bit. [+] Scriptlets are sane, if used [0] Subpackages other than -devel should require base package (versioned) [0] pkgconfig files in -devel subpackage [0] Dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself [0] Contain man pages, where they make sense It is a GUI application and there is online help. rpm -qp --requires look fine as well. -- 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