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=745510 --- Comment #7 from Douglas Schilling Landgraf <dougsland@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-10-17 13:25:31 EDT --- Hi Federico, (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > [OK] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build > > produces. The output should be posted in the review > > > > $ rpmlint vdsm.spec > > vdsm.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: vdsm-%{version}.tar.gz > > 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. > > > > $ rpmlint vdsm-4.9.0-0.192.g69eb727.fc15.src.rpm > > vdsm.src: W: invalid-url Source0: vdsm-%{version}.tar.gz > > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings > > At the moment we don't maintain a tarball release. > I'll update this as soon as we will have one. Yes, I am aware about that. This item are marked as [OK] > > [FAIL] 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. > > > > From: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL > > > > Please include a comment into the SPEC how the .tar.gz was build. > > I was not able to locate any reference (commit #, tag, branch) to "g69eb727" > > within the pointed upstream git tree -- > > http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=vdsm.git > > The commit g69eb727 is not present in the repository since it's actually the > spec modification. When the package will be accepted the hash will appear > upstream. > Please see Rafael Aquini comment (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745510#c6) > > [FAIL] 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. > > > > <snip> > > %files hook-faqemu > > %defattr(-,root,root,-) > > %doc COPYING > > %{_bindir}/qemu > > %{_bindir}/qemu-system-x86_64 > > > > qemu and qemu-system-x86_64 are binaries from > > qemu-system-x86-0.13.0-1.fc14.x86_64 package which are not owned by vdsm. > > Please includes into hook-faqemu session > > "Conflicts: qemu-system-x86" > > This was needed only on rhel. I will make this part conditional. > Ok. Before we go further, you should fix/answer Rafael's comments. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745510#c6 Thanks Douglas -- 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