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=789390 Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|16 |rawhide Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-03-18 14:09:59 EDT --- Review: [+] OK [-] NA [?] Issue [+] Package meets naming and packaging guidelines [+] Spec file matches base package name. [+] Spec has consistant macro usage. [?] Meets Packaging Guidelines. | + Needs to be looked at again once the current issues are corrected. [?] License | + There is no licence information at all in the "stops" tar. How does one know what license the content is under? [?] License field in spec matches | + Shouldn't the license be GPLv2+ (the plus?) and the license of the "stops" content? All the source files appear to be GPLv2+, not just GPLv2. [+] License file included in package | + No license included in the stops tar [+] Spec in American English [+] Spec is legible. [+] Sources match upstream md5sum: [ankur@ankur SPECS]$ md5sum aeolus-0.8.4.tar.bz2 stops-0.3.0.tar.bz2 ../SOURCES/aeolus-0.8.4.tar.bz2 ../SOURCES/stops-0.3.0.tar.bz2 0dcbfb2ab386419f306e1d947815163a aeolus-0.8.4.tar.bz2 2a7b1cae820408fa1cc655800d08d88f stops-0.3.0.tar.bz2 0dcbfb2ab386419f306e1d947815163a ../SOURCES/aeolus-0.8.4.tar.bz2 2a7b1cae820408fa1cc655800d08d88f ../SOURCES/stops-0.3.0.tar.bz2 [ankur@ankur SPECS]$ - Package needs ExcludeArch [?] BuildRequires correct | + Fails to build in mock: DEBUG: tiface.cc:24:31: fatal error: readline/readline.h: No such file or directory. You are missing a BR. Probably one of the following: [root@ankur ~]# repoquery '*/readline/readline.h' -f mingw32-readline-0:5.2-8.fc15.noarch readline-devel-0:6.2-2.fc16.i686 compat-readline5-devel-0:5.2-18.fc15.i686 readline-devel-0:6.2-2.fc16.x86_64 compat-readline5-devel-0:5.2-18.fc15.x86_64 - Spec handles locales/find_lang - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. [+] Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. [?] Package is code or permissible content. | + Need to confirm contents of the stop tar. - Doc subpackage needed/used. [+] Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig - .so files in -devel subpackage. - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} - .la files are removed. [+] Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file [?] Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. | + Fails to build on a mock fedora-rawhide-x86_64 configuration. The following will be checked once the package builds correctly :) - Package has no duplicate files in %files. - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. - Package owns all the directories it creates. - No rpmlint output. - final provides and requires are sane: (include output of for i in *rpm; do echo $i; rpm -qp --provides $i; echo =; rpm -qp --requires $i; echo; done manually indented after checking each line. I also remove the rpmlib junk and anything provided by glibc.) SHOULD Items: - Should build in mock. - Should build on all supported archs - Should function as described. - Should have sane scriptlets. - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. - Should have dist tag - Should package latest version - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Issues: 1. Package does not build 2. Licensing missing for the stops data 3. I see you've added a Requires: %{name}-stops there. What is that for? Did you forget to make a %{name}-stops subpackage in the spec? There may be more issues, but we'll look at them once the above are solved. Thanks, Ankur -- 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