Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892625 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(lemenkov@xxxxxxxx | |m) | --- Comment #9 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> --- Sorry for the delay. Ok, let's continue reviewing this. Fresh Koji scratch-build for F-18: * http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5120911 REVIEW: Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable - rpmlint is not silent and some of his messages must be addressed: work ~/Desktop: rpmlint resiprocate-* resiprocate.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Resiprocate ^^^ Not a critical but this clearly means that summary should be improved. Not a blocker. resiprocate.src: W: invalid-url Source0: resiprocate-1.8.6.tar.gz ^^^ Should point to https://www.resiprocate.org/files/pub/reSIProcate/releases/resiprocate-1.8.6.tar.gz . Not a blocker but should be fixed. resiprocate-b2bua.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C basic SIP B2BUA ^^^ Not a blocker, but should be fixed as well. resiprocate-b2bua.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US repro -> retro, re pro, re-pro ^^^ false positive. Should be ignored. resiprocate-b2bua.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/basicB2BUA ['/usr/lib64'] ^^^ That should be removed. See this for the details - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath resiprocate-b2bua.x86_64: W: no-documentation resiprocate-b2bua.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary basicB2BUA ^^^ Not an issue. resiprocate-clicktocall.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C click-to-call server process ^^^ Not a blocker. resiprocate-clicktocall.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US repro -> retro, re pro, re-pro ^^^ false positive. resiprocate-clicktocall.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/clicktocall ['/usr/lib64'] ^^^ rpath issue - similar to one above. resiprocate-clicktocall.x86_64: W: no-documentation resiprocate-clicktocall.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary clicktocall resiprocate-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation ^^^ Not an issue, just another one friendly reminder. resiprocate-libs.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C shared libraries http://www.resiprocate.org ^^^ Should be fixed (not a blocker). resiprocate-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US repro -> retro, re pro, re-pro resiprocate-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US librutil -> librettist resiprocate-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libresip -> Libreville resiprocate-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libdum -> Librium resiprocate-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dialogs -> dialog, dialog s ^^^ false positives. resiprocate-libs.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libsipdial-1.8.so ['/usr/lib64'] ^^^ rpath issue again. resiprocate-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libb2bua-1.8.so exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 ^^^ That's a bad architectural decision (shared libs shouldn't call exit but rather trow an exception/rerurn error code) but not an blocker issue. Think of this as of another friendly advice. resiprocate-libs.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libb2bua-1.8.so ['/usr/lib64'] ^^^ rpath again. resiprocate-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation ^^^ Can be ignored. This package doesn't have any docs and that was intended. resiprocate-presence-server.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C basic SIP presence server ^^^ Should be fixed. resiprocate-presence-server.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US repro -> retro, re pro, re-pro ^^^ false positive. resiprocate-presence-server.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/presSvr ['/usr/lib64'] ^^^ rpath again. resiprocate-presence-server.x86_64: W: no-documentation resiprocate-presence-server.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary presSvr ^^^ another one friendly reminder. resiprocate-repro.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/reprocmd ['/usr/lib64'] resiprocate-repro.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/repro ['/usr/lib64'] ^^^ rpath. resiprocate-repro.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib ^^^ false positive triggered by a systemd-related script. resiprocate-repro.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/repro repro resiprocate-repro.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/repro repro ^^^ Not an issue - this was intended. resiprocate-sipdialer.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C click-to-call utility ^^^ Looks like a copypasted leftover. Should be fixed. resiprocate-sipdialer.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US repro -> retro, re pro, re-pro ^^^ false positive. resiprocate-sipdialer.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/sipdialer ['/usr/lib64'] ^^^ rpath again - should be fixed. resiprocate-turn-server.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US reTurn -> re Turn, return, returns resiprocate-turn-server.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US standardised -> standardized, standardize, standard resiprocate-turn-server.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US repro -> retro, re pro, re-pro ^^^ false positive. resiprocate-turn-server.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/reTurnServer ['/usr/lib64'] ^^^ rpath again - should be fixed. resiprocate-turn-server.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib ^^^ false positive triggered by a systemd-related script. 10 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 9 errors, 32 warnings. work ~/Desktop: Ok, I see a number of issues and some of them should be fixed before final approval. + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines except the issues already mentioned above. + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (Vovida). - The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, MUST be included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum resiprocate-1.8.6.tar.gz* 4dac3b7a17fa7842f5dbe994ba7cfef720f62b19781f8912f106ad6e3adfd5f8 resiprocate-1.8.6.tar.gz 4dac3b7a17fa7842f5dbe994ba7cfef720f62b19781f8912f106ad6e3adfd5f8 resiprocate-1.8.6.tar.gz.1 sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. See koji link above. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. 0 No need to handle locales. + The package stores shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths, and it calls ldconfig in %post and %postun. + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. 0 The package is not designed to be relocatable. + The package owns all directories that it creates. + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. 0 The package DOESN'T have a %clean section, so it won't build cleanly on systems with old rpm (EL-4 and EL-5). Beware. + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissible content. 0 No extremely large documentation files. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. + Header files are stored in a -devel package. 0 No static libraries. 0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files. + The library file(s) that end in .so (without suffix) is(are) stored in a -devel package. + The -devel package requires the lib package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}-lib%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. 0 Not a GUI application. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. 0 At the beginning of %install, the package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) so it won't build cleanly on systems with old rpm (EL-4 and EL-5). Beware. + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. Ok, so here are some remaining issues: - Remove rpath - Fix capitalization of descriptions - Fix sipdialer summary - Add licensing info into package (mark it as %doc) - Use a direct internel link to the source tarball Please address/explain these issues and I'll finish review. -- 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=GAuw3Qd6A9&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review