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=730888 James Laska <jlaska@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(dougsland@redhat. | |com) --- Comment #2 from James Laska <jlaska@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-08-23 15:49:36 EDT --- > [ WARN ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package # rpmlint nagios-plugins-rhev.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64/result/nagios-plugins-rhev-1.0.0-1.fc16.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64/result/nagios-plugins-rhev-1.0.0-1.fc16.src.rpm nagios-plugins-rhev.src: W: file-size-mismatch nagios-plugins-rhev-1.0.0.tar.gz = 9403, https://github.com/dougsland/nagios-plugins-rhev/raw/master/nagios-plugins-rhev-1.0.0.tar.gz = 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. > [ OK ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming > Guidelines > [ OK ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [...] > [ ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines > [ OK ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license > and meet the Licensing Guidelines > [ WARN ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the > actual license The upstream project page shows, GPLv2 while the .spec lists GPLv2+. I don't believe those are in conflict > [ OK ] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the > license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of > the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc COPYING is included in %doc > [ OK ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. > [ OK ] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. > [ OK ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream > source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for > this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, > please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. # rpm2cpio nagios-plugins-rhev-1.0.0-1.fc15.src.rpm | cpio -id 23 blocks # md5sum nagios-plugins-rhev-1.0.0.tar.gz 85fa94a6bcbf1937ecdf3bd010867559 nagios-plugins-rhev-1.0.0.tar.gz # curl https://github.com/dougsland/nagios-plugins-rhev/raw/master/nagios-plugins-rhev-1.0.0.tar.gz 2>/dev/null | md5sum 987d8ef38a72cdc8811a5752825c160a - > [ OK ] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary > rpms on at least one primary architecture Built using mock for -r fedora-16-x86_64 > [ N/A ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on > an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the > spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST > have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package > does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST > be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line > [ WARN ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except > for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging > Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply > common sense. Should python-paramiko be listed as a Requires? It is imported from within check_rhev. I assume this is a runtime requirement, not a build requirement? Or perhaps both? > [ N/A ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by > using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly > forbidden > [ N/A ] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared > library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's > default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. > [ N/A ] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must > state this fact in the request for review, along with the > rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without > this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. > [ FAIL ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does > not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package > which does create that directory. This package should "Requires: nagios-plugins" to ensure that {_libdir}/nagios/plugins is available upon install. > [ OK ] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files > listing. > [ OK ] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should > be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section > must include a %defattr(...) line. > [ OK ] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf > %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). > [ OK ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. > [ OK ] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. > [ N/A ] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The > definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but > is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or > quantity). > [ OK ] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the > runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the > program must run properly if it is not present. Only documentation is included in %doc > [ N/A ] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. > [ N/A ] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. > [ N/A ] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: > pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). > [ N/A ] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. > libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) > must go in a -devel package. > [ N/A ] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the > base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = > %{version}-%{release} > [ N/A ] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must > be removed in the spec if they are built. > [ N/A ] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a > %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with > desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your > packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put > a comment in the spec file with your explanation. > [ OK ] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by > other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to > be installed should own the files or directories that other packages > may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora > should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories > owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a > good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, > then please present that at package review time. > [ OK ] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf > %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). > [ OK ] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. > [ OK ] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as > a separate file from upstream, the packager query upstream to include > it. License text included in COPYING file that comes with upstream tarball > [ N/A ] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file > should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if > available. > [ OK ] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3296515 > [ N/A ] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all > supported architectures. It's a noarch package > [ OK ] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as > described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for > example. I didn't fully setup nagios or the plugin, but I did install and run the check_rhev script manually. > [ N/A ] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is > vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. > [ N/A ] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base > package using a fully versioned dependency. > [ N/A ] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their > usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be > placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg > itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or > gdb. > [ N/A ] 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. > [ WARN ] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If > it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense.[34] Not a hard requirement, other nagios-plugins-* don't seem to provide manpages. It might be helpful to include a README == Python == > [ OK ] MUST: Python eggs must be built from source. They cannot simply drop an egg > from upstream into the proper directory. (See prebuilt binaries Guidelines > for details) > [ OK ] MUST: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build > process. > [ N/A ] MUST: When building a compat package, it must install using > easy_install -m so it won't conflict with the main package. > [ N/A ] MUST: 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. == Additional == Since you are also the upstream for this package, I poked around a bit more. Feel free to direct this feedback elsewhere. [ WARN ] - In the upstream setup.py included in the tarball, there appears to be a copy'n'paste error. Should the name be changed to: - setup(name='python-confparser', version='1.0.0', + setup(name='nagios-plugins-rhev', version='1.0.0', [ WARN ] - It's worrisome to edit the check_rhev script directly to setup configuration parameters. Is it possible to setup some sort of /etc/nagios/rhev.cfg (similar to how nrpe does) and add optparse support to check_rhev so the admin can provide alternate configuration files? -- 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