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=784145 --- Comment #1 from Niels de Vos <ndevos@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-04-22 13:49:12 EDT --- Created attachment 579325 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=579325 Patch to fix comile errors with -Werror Here is the review, please correct any deficiencies and post an updated spec and src.rpm: +:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing MUST Items: [-] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64/result/*.rpm libomxil-bellagio.spec libomxil-bellagio.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codecs -> code cs, code-cs, codex libomxil-bellagio.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functionalities -> functionalists, functionality, functionalist libomxil-bellagio.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US alsa -> Alas, alas, Alisa libomxil-bellagio.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US aac -> AC, Ac, ac libomxil-bellagio.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ogg -> Gog, egg, org libomxil-bellagio.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://ignum.dl.sourceforge.net/project/omxil/omxil/Bellagio%200.9.3/libomxil-bellagio-0.9.3.tar.gz <urlopen error [Errno 104] Connection reset by peer> libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codecs -> code cs, code-cs, codex libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functionalities -> functionalists, functionality, functionalist libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US alsa -> Alas, alas, Alisa libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US aac -> AC, Ac, ac libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ogg -> Gog, egg, org libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/bellagio/libomxclocksrc.so libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/bellagio/libomxaudio_effects.so libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/omxloaders/libomxdynamicloader.so libomxil-bellagio.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/bellagio/libomxvideosched.so libomxil-bellagio-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libomxil-bellagio.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://ignum.dl.sourceforge.net/project/omxil/omxil/Bellagio%200.9.3/libomxil-bellagio-0.9.3.tar.gz <urlopen error [Errno 104] Connection reset by peer> 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 17 warnings. The "spelling-error" can be ignored, looks fine to me (although I'm not a native English speaker). The "devel-file-in-non-devel-package" seem to be caused by the .so symlink. I do not know if that symlink is required for correct functioning. If not, please remove those symlinks, if they are required, you may ignore the warning (the .so are in their own directory). "invalid-url" needs to be fixed, see below. "no-documentation" in the -devel package seems fine as well, there is no developers documentation available in the sources either. The OpenMAX specification seems to be documented at http://www.khronos.org/openmax. [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] 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. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [-] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Please use a URL as described here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Sourceforge.net $ sha1sum libomxil-bellagio-0.9.3.tar.gz SOURCES/libomxil-bellagio-0.9.3.tar.gz 04afd1bde078afa5a03190b6c6865406e2bd01d8 libomxil-bellagio-0.9.3.tar.gz cff7692238a860f22a67ca6f0efcbdc63922f426 SOURCES/libomxil-bellagio-0.9.3.tar.gz To download, use this to keep the time of the archive: $ wget -m -nd \ http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/omxil/omxil/Bellagio%200.9.3/libomxil-bellagio-0.9.3.tar.gz [+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Locally built with mock on x86_64 and on Fedora ARM (as this is blocking the ARMTracker Bug): http://arm.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=752390 Attaching a patch that makes it possible to build with -Werror, it would make it possible to remove the first sed-expression. Maybe you can provide this patch upstream (I tried but am not able to attach patches there). [+] 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. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [+] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] 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. [+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). the [+] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. SHOULD Items: [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [=] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. It would be appreciated if you can build the provided test-programs and package them in a -tests sub-package. You can build the test-programs like this: make check "LDFLAGS=-L$PWD/src/.libs" \ "CFLAGS=-I$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_includedir}" If you can think of a way (I could not) to include automated tests with %check, that would be a great alternative. [+] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. -- 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