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=746031 --- Comment #2 from Mo Morsi <mmorsi@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-10-17 15:45:29 EDT --- OK thank you for the review. Updated package: Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3437829 Spec URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-aeolus-cli.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-aeolus-cli-0.1.0-5.fc15.src.rpm > > [ 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 > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL for how to deal with > > this. > > The instructions included in the .spec for creating the Source URL do not work. > > # git clone git://git.fedorahosted.org/aeolus/conductor.git > # git checkout next > # cd services/image_factory/aeolus-image > # rake gem > # grab image_factory_console-0.0.1.gem from the pkg subdir > Updated these to reflect the new rubygem-aeolus-cli source location > > [ 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 > > <code>filesystem</code> or <code>man</code> 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. (refer to > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FileAndDirectoryOwnership) > > > Transaction Check Error: > file /usr/bin/aeolus-image from install of > rubygem-aeolus-cli-0.1.0-4.fc16.noarch conflicts with file from package > rubygem-aeolus-image-0.0.1-5.fc16.noarch > file /usr/share/man/man1/aeolus-image-build.1.gz from install of > rubygem-aeolus-cli-0.1.0-4.fc16.noarch conflicts with file from package > rubygem-aeolus-image-0.0.1-5.fc16.noarch > file /usr/share/man/man1/aeolus-image-list.1.gz from install of > rubygem-aeolus-cli-0.1.0-4.fc16.noarch conflicts with file from package > rubygem-aeolus-image-0.0.1-5.fc16.noarch > OK this file conflict was fixed w/ the latest version of rubygem-aeolus-image (now in updates-testing). I added the aeolus-image dependency to the aeolus-cli specfile, specifying the minimum version required. > > [ WARN ] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as > > described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. > > I have no idea how to test this ... any suggestions? Yes, a surface verification would be to make sure you can run /usr/bin/aeolus-image --help without any errors / segfaults. That is probably good enough for the time being. > > [ FAIL ] The package must provide rubygem(%{gemname}) where gemname is the name from the Gem's specification. For every dependency on a Gem named gemdep, the package must contain a Requires on rubygem(%{gemdep}) with the same version constraints as the Gem > > The package does provide the rubygem: "Provides: rubygem(%{gemname}) = > %{version}" > > However, it does not require the same version as expected: "Requires: > rubygem(%{gemname}) = %{version}" > > It does seem odd for a package to require itself. Note the guidelines state "___for every dependency___ the package must contain a requires..." This dependency is not for the package itself. Believe that take care of everything, again thank you for the review. -- 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