https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844674 Kashyap Chamarthy <kchamart@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kchamart@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Kashyap Chamarthy <kchamart@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Hi, I didn't realize the package was already 'ASSIGNED' for review till the end. Anyhow, posting my review comments here, fwiw. OK - rpmlint output. I think the below Error can be safely ignored. #-------------------------------------------------------------------------# kashyap@SPECS$ rpmlint python-swiftclient.spec ../SRPMS/python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/python-swiftclient-* python-swiftclient.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary swift 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. #-------------------------------------------------------------------------# OK - The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK - %{?dist} tag is used in release OK - The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK - The spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK - The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK - The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines (license is ASL 2.0) NA - Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun OK - The package MUST successfully compile and build. (It does build) OK - The spec file must be written in American English. OK - The spec file for the package MUST be legible OK - The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL: #-------------------------------------------------------------------------# kashyap@SOURCES$ sha256sum python-swiftclient-1.1.1.tar.gz 73e8a1c0bb7354b7c0af5891f2fdf7b4fe9734ddc7fd38edb531c9ebdca350bc python-swiftclient-1.1.1.tar.gz kashyap@SOURCES$ sha256sum python-swiftclient-1.1.1.tar.gz-from-upstream 73e8a1c0bb7354b7c0af5891f2fdf7b4fe9734ddc7fd38edb531c9ebdca350bc python-swiftclient-1.1.1.tar.gz-from-upstream kashyap@SOURCES$ #-------------------------------------------------------------------------# OK - Successfully koji scratch build: #-------------------------------------------------------------------------# kashyap@SPECS$ koji build --scratch f18 ../SRPMS/python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Uploading srpm: ../SRPMS/python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm [====================================] 100% 00:00:02 49.67 KiB 22.48 KiB/sec Created task: 4347259 Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4347259 Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)... 4347259 build (f18, python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm): open (buildvm-29.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 4347260 buildArch (python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm, noarch): free 4347260 buildArch (python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm, noarch): free -> open (buildvm-25.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 4347260 buildArch (python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm, noarch): open (buildvm-25.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 1 open 1 done 0 failed 4347259 build (f18, python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm): open (buildvm-29.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 0 open 2 done 0 failed 4347259 build (f18, python-swiftclient-1.1.1-1.fc16.src.rpm) completed successfully #-------------------------------------------------------------------------# NA - The spec file MUST handle locales properly (no translations) NA - The package is not relocatable OK - A package must own all directories that it creates OK - A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings OK - Permissions on files must be set properly OK - Each package must have a %clean section (This is taken care of from F13+ automatically) OK - Each package must consistently use macros OK - The package must contain code, or permissible content OK - Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage (documentation goes into the subpackge 'python-swiftclient-doc-1.1.1-1.fc16.noarch.rpm') OK - If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application NA - Header files must be in a -devel package -- no devel package NA - Static libraries must be in a -static package -- no static package NA - Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' OK - Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives NA - Packages containing GUI applications MUST include a .desktop file OK - No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK - All file names in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8 OK - The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. #-------------------------------------------------------------------------# Looks good to me. -- 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