Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906764 --- Comment #6 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking@xxxxxx> --- Here's the review. The package looks good and is almost ready. There are just a few things that need to be fixed: - the required package x11-utils does not exist => replace it with xorg-x11-utils - dejavusansmono-bold.ttf and dejavuserifcondensed.ttf are dangling symlinks because the fonts files they're supposed to point to don't exist - you can drop the slash between %{buildroot} and %{_FOOdir} because the latter already starts with a slash, e.g. %{buildroot}/%{_bindir} expands to /home/martin/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}.x86_64//usr/bin $ rpmlint *.rpm manaplus.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eAthena -> Athena, e Athena, heathen manaplus.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Evol -> Vol, E vol, Ecol manaplus.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency liberation-mono-fonts manaplus.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency liberation-sans-fonts manaplus.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eAthena -> Athena, e Athena, heathen manaplus.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Evol -> Vol, E vol, Ecol manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/liberationsansmono-bold.ttf /usr/share/fonts/liberation/LiberationMono-Bold.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/mplus-1p-bold.ttf /usr/share/fonts/mplus/mplus-1p-bold.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/dejavuserifcondensed-bold.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansSerifCondensed-Bold.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/dejavusans-bold.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans-Bold.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/liberationsans.ttf /usr/share/fonts/liberation/LiberationSans-Regular.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/dejavusansmono.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/dejavusans.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/liberationsansmono.ttf /usr/share/fonts/liberation/LiberationMono-Regular.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/mplus-1p-regular.ttf /usr/share/fonts/mplus/mplus-1p-regular.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/liberationsans-bold.ttf /usr/share/fonts/liberation/LiberationSans-Bold.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/dejavusansmono-bold.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansMono-Bold.ttf manaplus.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/dejavuserifcondensed.ttf /usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSansSerifCondensed.ttf 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 16 warnings. Most of the errors/warnings are false positive. However, the following symlinks point to non-existent files: /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/dejavusansmono-bold.ttf /usr/share/manaplus/data/fonts/dejavuserifcondensed.ttf --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] 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 manaplus-1.3.2.3.tar.xz* 8de6a13606cd6e0af7e9773a85a535ed1c869bcff1f08a9f1454690f2e7c5bb9 manaplus-1.3.2.3.tar.xz 8de6a13606cd6e0af7e9773a85a535ed1c869bcff1f08a9f1454690f2e7c5bb9 manaplus-1.3.2.3.tar.xz.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), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [.] 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: .desktop files must be installed with desktop-file-install or checked with desktop-file-validate. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [.] 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: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [.] SHOULD: All patches should be commented in the spec file [+] 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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=08OcgUcFlm&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review