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=799651 Alec Leamas <leamas.alec@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |leamas.alec@xxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Alec Leamas <leamas.alec@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-03-09 04:56:26 EST --- Just running fedora-review, I get the following (just problem parts) I also note that that %patch0 lacks the prescribed comment. Don't really have time for a complete review. Hope this helps, --a Issues: [!]: MUST Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: smb4k-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm : /usr/lib/kde4/smb4kconfigdialog.so smb4k-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm : /usr/lib/kde4/smb4knetworkbrowser.so smb4k-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm : /usr/lib/kde4/smb4ksearchdialog.so smb4k-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm : /usr/lib/kde4/smb4ksharesview.so smb4k-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm : /usr/lib/libsmb4kcore.so smb4k-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm : /usr/lib/libsmb4kdialogs.so [!]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5 [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files devel section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed [!]: MUST Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using desktop- file-install file if it is a GUI application. [!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5 [!]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). Note: Using both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT Also uses both %{name} and smb4k in different places./a [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. rpmlint smb4k-0.10.12-1.fc18.src.rpm smb4k.src:43: W: macro-in-comment %patch1 smb4k.src:100: W: macro-in-comment %{_kde4_includedir} 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. rpmlint smb4k-debuginfo-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint smb4k-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm smb4k.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.10.11-1 ['0.10.12-1.fc18', '0.10.12-1'] smb4k.i686: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib/libsmb4kdialogs.so libsmb4kdialogs.so smb4k.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libsmb4kcore.so.3.2.0 exit@GLIBC_2.0 smb4k.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libsmb4kcore.so smb4k.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/smb4k-0.10.12/COPYING smb4k.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary smb4k_umount smb4k.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary smb4k_mount smb4k.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary smb4k_sudowriter smb4k.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary smb4k smb4k.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary smb4k_kill 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 8 warnings. rpmlint smb4k-devel-0.10.12-1.fc18.i686.rpm smb4k-devel.i686: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. /home/mk/tmp/smb4k/smb4k-0.10.12.tar.bz2 : MD5SUM this package : 26205c779461d1e0ec07b310a6cbabf1 MD5SUM upstream package : 4c5b4f905b8b5db0c15c1fc094abffa7 -- 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