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=769697 --- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2012-01-01 08:17:28 EST --- rpmlint output: nested.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/nested/txt2tags.py 0644L /usr/bin/env nested.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nested 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. Get rid of the shebang in txt2tags.py. Shebangs aren't necessary in python libraries, since they're not supposed to be run from the shell anyway. ** The python spec file templates use %{__python} setup.py install -O1 --skip-build --root %{buildroot} as the install command. I would recommend using this form. ** Please note also that the use of the %{__python} macro is not necessary - you can replace all occurrences with plain "python". Although macros exist for "mv" (%{__mv}), "rm" (%{__rm}) and so on, I find these make the spec file harder to read. This is, however, just a question of opinion. ** MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. OK MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. 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}. OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK cbdc61bf592477116569ddb69cad07d5 nested-1.2.2.tar.gz cbdc61bf592477116569ddb69cad07d5 ../SOURCES/nested-1.2.2.tar.gz MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. OK MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. OK MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. N/A MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files ending in .so 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, architecture dependent dependency. N/A MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. NEEDSWORK - This is a GUI application and really should have a desktop file installed. MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK EPEL: Clean section exists. OK EPEL: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK EPEL: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A ** Please write a proper desktop file as per http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files and send it upstream for inclusion in the nested distribution tarball. I believe you can use nested/nested.png (or .svg) as the icon. Install it into %{_datadir}/pixmaps. -- 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