Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807383 --- Comment #9 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> --- A few mistakes here, including one or two eyebrow-raisers. Let's start with the reviews in comment 3 and comment 7: > [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines . Please be careful here. Basically, this MUST item is the hardest one to acknowledge with a brief '[+]', since that means you've checked _everything_ written on the following hierarchy of Wiki pages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines Not only would you need to try to find a section in the guidelines for every line of the spec file, you would also need to do that for the built rpms and the build job output (as created by Mock or plain rpmbuild). > [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [19] > > [.] OK, not applicable Cannot be true, because the reviewed package places a static lib in the -devel packages: | %files devel | %{python_sitearch}/%{name}/_PythonMagick.a Please revisit https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries and comment on it, if you disagree or if there are questions. > [+] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [20] PythonMagick is a Python module to be used within Python software. Leaving aside the Static Library guidelines for a moment, how does the _PythonMagick.a library fit into all this? $ rpmls -p PythonMagick-devel-0.9.7-2.fc18.x86_64.rpm -rw-r--r-- /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/PythonMagick/_PythonMagick.a > [+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must > require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} [21] The reviewed package does Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} so %_isa is not used. Minor issue only, but can lead to trouble in some situations. > %description devel > > %{name}-devel contains the library links you'll need to develop > Python ImageMagick applications. This description would deserve an explanation. Specifically: Which "links"? And when are they needed? > Group: Development/Libraries "Development/Languages" is very common for Python modules. > Requires: boost-python > Requires: ImageMagick-c++ >= 6.4 > Requires: python >= 2.4 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires In short: Add comments to the spec file giving the rationale for each of those explicit dependencies or drop them as appropriate. The section in the guidelines may read as if it's specific to shared libs (here the "ImageMagick-c++" explicit Requires), but basically it applies to all other explicit Requires, too. > Requires: python >= 2.4 Currently the package automatically depends on python(abi) = 2.7 libpython2.7.so.1.0()(64bit) and explicitly on python >= 2.4 so which is right? Preferably, you drop the explicit dep on python >= 2.4, since the automatic dependency is on Python 2.7. > /bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CXX --mode=link g++ -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -DBOOST_PYTHON_DYNAMIC_LIB -avoid-version -module -L/usr/lib -Wl,-z,relro -o _PythonMagick.la -rpath /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/PythonMagick pythonmagick_src/libpymagick.la helpers_src/libhelper.la -L/usr/lib -lboost_python -lMagick++ -lMagickCore -lpython2.7 > This is a line from the x86_64 build job output. The '-L/usr/lib' indicates that somewhere an incorrect libdir value, perhaps a hardcoded one, is used. Tracking down where and telling upstream about it might be worthwhile. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qDbOWsGwWx&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review