Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=910539 nucleo <alekcejk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from nucleo <alekcejk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- MUST Items: + rpmlint output $ rpmlint picmi-4.10.0-1.fc18.i686.rpm picmi-debuginfo-4.10.0-1.fc18.i686.rpm picmi-4.10.0-2.fc18.src.rpm picmi.spec picmi.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) nonogram -> monogram, sonogram, monograph picmi.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US nonogram -> monogram, sonogram, monograph picmi.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/picmi-4.10.0/COPYING picmi.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary picmi picmi.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) nonogram -> monogram, sonogram, monograph 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. + named and versioned according to the Package Naming Guidelines. Package name match the upstream tarball name picmi-4.10.0.tar.xz + spec file name picmi.spec matches base package name + complies with all the legal guidelines: + License: GPLv2+ and GFDL, matches actual license + No known patent problems + No emulator, no firmware, no binary-only or prebuilt components + COPYING (GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE Version 2) packaged as %doc + source matches upstream: MD5: 65ef7316ba191d4aee89df00a859399f picmi-4.10.0.tar.xz SHA1: fddda723e0168ec52e05e7e4791164f4c5b7eb6c picmi-4.10.0.tar.xz SHA256: d6ba0b94cbdfeaf5aee02cc361ae5cb38dc590b8e9a33b5f37ff00d853a46097 picmi-4.10.0.tar.xz + builds on at least one arch build from mock is in F18 kde-unstable repo + no known non-working arches, so no ExcludeArch needed + no missing BuildRequires (builds in mock) + locales are handled properly by using %find_lang %{name} --with-kde macro + ldconfig call not needed (no shared libraries) + no duplicated system libraries + package not relocatable (no Prefix tag) + directory ownership correct (doesn't own directories owned by another package, owns all package-specific directories %{_kde4_appsdir}/%{name}/) + no duplicate files in %files + permissions correct, %defattr(-,root,root,-) not needed now, executables have executable permissions + macros used where possible (%{name}, %{version}, %{buildroot}, %{_target_platform}, %{cmake_kde4}, %{_kde4_datadir}, %{_kde4_bindir}, %{_kde4_iconsdir},%{_kde4_appsdir} ) + non-code content: only permitted content, themes, levels, icons under license that matches the code + no large documentation files, so no -doc package needed + no %doc files required at runtime + no header files, no -devel package needed + no static libraries, so no -static package needed + no devel symlinks which would need to be in a -devel subpackage + devel packages must require the base package (no -devel package) + no .la files + picmi.desktop file for the GUI app picmi present + desktop-file-validate is used in %check and the picmi.desktop file passes validation + all filenames are valid UTF-8 + other packaging guidelines: + complies with the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard (all files in %{_kde4_datadir}, %{_kde4_bindir}, %{_kde4_iconsdir},%{_kde4_appsdir}) + proper changelog, tags, BuildRequires, Summary, Description (got from picmi's documentation) + no non-UTF-8 characters + all relevant documentation included as %doc (COPYING) + RPM_OPT_FLAGS are used in %{cmake_kde4} macro + debuginfo package is valid (contains stripped symbols from ELF binary and source code related to it) + no rpaths (no check-rpaths error) + no configuration files, so %config guideline doesn't apply + no init scripts, so init script guideline doesn't apply + timestamps are preserved + %{?_smp_mflags} used + not a web application, so web application guideline doesn't apply + no conflicts SHOULD Items: - license already included upstream, no COPYING.DOC, but documentations says GFDL, included COPYING with wrong FSF address + no translations for description and summary provided by upstream + package builds in mock (built for kde-unstable) - successfully tested the package functionality (no testing yet) + scriptlets are sane (updating icon chache in %post, %postun, %posttrans) + subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency (no subpackages) + no .pc files, so "placement of .pc files" is irrelevant + no file dependencies - package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts APPROVED -- 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=RX1FjtAdKW&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review