https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866358 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> --- Hi! REVIEW: [+] OK [-] NA [?] Issue [+] Package meets naming and packaging guidelines [+] Spec file matches base package name. [+] Spec has consistant macro usage. [+] Meets Packaging Guidelines. [+] License [+] License field in spec matches [+] License file included in package [+] Spec in American English [+] Spec is legible. [+] Sources match upstream md5sum: [ankur@ankur SPECS]$ review-md5check.sh ams.spec Getting http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/alsamodular/alsamodular/2.0.1/ams-2.0.1.tar.bz2 to /tmp/review/ams-2.0.1.tar.bz2 % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --:--:-- 0:00:01 --:--:-- 0 100 279k 100 279k 0 0 195k 0 0:00:01 0:00:01 --:--:-- 195k 0d41bd5aac066aa98be45fd7ab12d35f /tmp/review/ams-2.0.1.tar.bz2 0d41bd5aac066aa98be45fd7ab12d35f /home/ankur/rpmbuild/SOURCES/ams-2.0.1.tar.bz2 removed `/tmp/review/ams-2.0.1.tar.bz2' removed directory: `/tmp/review' [ankur@ankur SPECS]$ [-] Package needs ExcludeArch [+] BuildRequires correct [-] Spec handles locales/find_lang [-] Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. [+] Package is code or permissible content. [-] 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. [+] 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. [ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ rpmlint ../SPECS/ams.spec ./ams-2.0.1-5.fc18.src.rpm /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/*.rpm ams.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Alsa -> Alas, Ala, Alisa ams.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) realtime -> mealtime, real time, real-time ams.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US realtime -> mealtime, real time, real-time ams.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US usr -> use, us, user ams.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Alsa -> Alas, Ala, Alisa ams.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) realtime -> mealtime, real time, real-time ams.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US realtime -> mealtime, real time, real-time ams.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US usr -> use, us, user ams.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Alsa -> Alas, Ala, Alisa ams.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) realtime -> mealtime, real time, real-time ams.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US realtime -> mealtime, real time, real-time ams.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/ams-2.0.1/COPYING 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 11 warnings. [ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ ^^ Looks okay [+] final provides and requires are sane: (include output of for i in *rpm; do echo $i; rpm [-]qp --provides $i; echo =; rpm -qp --requires $i; echo; done manually indented after checking each line. I also remove the rpmlib junk and anything provided by glibc.) [ankur@ankur result]$ review-req-check == ams-2.0.1-5.fc19.src.rpm == Provides: Requires: desktop-file-utils alsa-lib-devel clalsadrv-devel jack-audio-connection-kit-devel ladspa-devel fftw2-devel qt-devel libtool automake autoconf == ams-2.0.1-5.fc19.x86_64.rpm == Provides: ams = 2.0.1-5.fc19 ams(x86-64) = 2.0.1-5.fc19 Requires: ladspa-cmt-plugins ladspa-mcp-plugins ladspa-rev-plugins ladspa-swh-plugins ladspa-vco-plugins libQtCore.so.4()(64bit) libQtGui.so.4()(64bit) libQtOpenGL.so.4()(64bit) libasound.so.2()(64bit) libasound.so.2(ALSA_0.9)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libclalsadrv.so.2()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libjack.so.0()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.15)(64bit) libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.11)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) == ams-debuginfo-2.0.1-5.fc19.x86_64.rpm == Provides: ams-debuginfo = 2.0.1-5.fc19 ams-debuginfo(x86-64) = 2.0.1-5.fc19 Requires: ^^ Looks okay 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: None. Package looks good to go! XXX APPROVED XXX -- 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