[Bug 787293] Review Request: sparkleshare - Easy file sharing based on git repositories

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=787293

Ofer Schreiber <oschreib@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |oschreib@xxxxxxxxxx

--- Comment #3 from Ofer Schreiber <oschreib@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-02-06 12:20:17 EST ---
I'm not an official packager yet, but here's my review:

MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1] 

[oschreib@jerusalem spark]$ rpmlint sparkleshare-0.8.0-1.fc16.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

[oschreib@jerusalem spark]$ rpmlint sparkleshare-0.8.0-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm 
sparkleshare.x86_64: E: no-binary
sparkleshare.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
sparkleshare.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/sparkleshare-0.8.0/NEWS
sparkleshare.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/sparkleshare-0.8.0/LICENSE
sparkleshare.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/sparkleshare-0.8.0/AUTHORS
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.

1. Any reason why NEWS, LICENSE and AUTHORS are executable?

2. About the binary issues - sounds like rpmlint doesn't think .exe or .dll are
binaries. 

MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .

PASS

MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2]

PASS

MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .

PASS

MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[3]

PASS

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.[4]

PASS

MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]

PASS

MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]

PASS

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.

[oschreib@jerusalem spark]$ md5sum *tar.gz
e529adb83ae9ddba68c4b13c3823e2fc  sparkleshare-0.8.0.tar.gz

Verified.
PASS

MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]

PASS

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. [8]

N/A

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.

PASS

MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9]

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. [10]

Not sure about this one, you should consult with someone familar with mono
packaging.


MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11]

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. [12]

N/A

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. [13]

PASS

MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)[14]

PASS

MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. [15]

FAIL
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root  17733 Feb  6 18:05
/usr/lib64/sparkleshare/SparkleLib.dll.mdb
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root  46565 Feb  6 18:05
/usr/lib64/sparkleshare/SparkleShare.exe.mdb

.mdb shouldn't be executables.

MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16]

PASS

MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17]

PASS

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). [18]

N/A

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. [18]

N/A

MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [19]

N/A

MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [20]

FAIL
Sounds to me like .mdb files (mentioned above) should be in a seperate package

MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release} [21]

N/A

MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.[19]

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.
[22]

PASS
desktop-file-install is not used here, but according to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop
desktop-file-validate is fine as well.


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. [23]

PASS

MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [24]

PASS

-- 
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



[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]