Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ipw2100-firmware - Firmware for Intel® PRO/Wireless 2100 network adaptors https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217350 ------- Additional Comments From notting@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-22 23:38 EST ------- Dominik - feel free to jump in, but I thought I'd kick-start it. MUST items: - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines - OK - Spec file matches base package name. - OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. - OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. - *** ** Group tag should probably be 'Firmware', per discussion on fedora-packaging. - License - OK - License field in spec matches - *** ** Per fedora-packaging discussion, License tag should be 'Redistributable firmware, no modification permitted' - License file included in package - OK - Spec in American English - OK - Spec is legible. - OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: - OK - Package needs ExcludeArch - *** This packge is noarch. However, it is only relevant for certain architectures. Therefore, it may be helpful to add: ExclusiveArch: i386 x86_64 to tell composition tools to only include the package on those arches. - BuildRequires correct - OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. - OK - Package has a correct %clean section. - OK - Package has correct buildroot - *** It is suggested to change to: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) - Package is code or permissible content. - OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. - OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. - OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. - OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. - OK - No rpmlint output. - **** source rpmlint: E: ipw2100-firmware hardcoded-library-path in /lib/firmware/LICENSE.ipw2100. W: ipw2100-firmware setup-not-quiet E: ipw2100-firmware hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/lib/firmware E: ipw2100-firmware hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/lib/firmware/ E: ipw2100-firmware hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/lib/firmware/LICENSE.ipw2100 E: ipw2100-firmware hardcoded-library-path in /lib/firmware/LICENSE.ipw2100 E: ipw2100-firmware hardcoded-library-path in /lib/firmware/LICENSE.ipw2100 E: ipw2100-firmware hardcoded-library-path in /lib/firmware/*.fw hardcoded-library-path is OK, as /lib/firmware is the defined dir. Feel free to fix the setup warning. Binary package: W: ipw2100-firmware symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/doc/ipw2100-firmware-1.3/LICENSE /lib/firmware/LICENSE.ipw2100 Any reason it's a symlink as opposed to just a file? - final provides and requires are sane - OK SHOULD Items: - Should build in mock. - OK - Should build on all supported archs - OK - Should function as described. - not tested - Should have dist tag - OK - Should package latest version - OK -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review