https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844070 --- Comment #2 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> --- Here we go. The package contains a couple of issues that need to be addressed: - According to the guidelines, package names must not contain periods. I suggest to replace it with a dash. => AlsaMixer-app http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Separators - The spec filename has a trailing tilde that should be dropped. - Replace the tab characters in the BuildRequires lines with spaces to make rpmlint happy (see below). - If upstream is still alive, please ask them to update the FSF address in COPYING and the source files. - gcc reports several warnings about deprecated non-const char pointer initializations: warning: deprecated conversion from string constant to 'char*' [-Wwrite-strings] Future versions of gcc might drop support for this. Thus, I recommend to patch the sources by adding the missing "const" modifier before "char*". That's not a blocker, though. $ rpmlint ./AlsaMixer.app-* AlsaMixer.app.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/AlsaMixer.app-0.1/COPYING AlsaMixer.app.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary AlsaMixer.app AlsaMixer.app.src:10: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 10) AlsaMixer.app-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/AlsaMixer.app-0.1/Xpm.cc AlsaMixer.app-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/AlsaMixer.app-0.1/Mixer.h AlsaMixer.app-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/AlsaMixer.app-0.1/Mixer.cc AlsaMixer.app-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/AlsaMixer.app-0.1/Xpm.h AlsaMixer.app-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/AlsaMixer.app-0.1/Main.cc 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 2 warnings. --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [X] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. - dots are not allowed in package names => replace it with a dash, for example [X] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. - drop the trailing tilde from the spec filename [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. - GPLv2+ according to source file headers [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The 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. $ sha256sum AlsaMixer.app-0.1.tar.gz* 7d55d3ba5ffd82bcddcb546e0aa33ab8638df5d1418aa170e91c42e35c0c8c15 AlsaMixer.app-0.1.tar.gz 7d55d3ba5ffd82bcddcb546e0aa33ab8638df5d1418aa170e91c42e35c0c8c15 AlsaMixer.app-0.1.tar.gz.upstream [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache must be updated. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), ... [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, ... [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. EPEL <= 5 only: [X] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field. [X] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}. [X] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. [.] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [+] 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. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [.] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. -- 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