Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=858068 greg.hellings@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from greg.hellings@xxxxxxxxx --- $ rpmlint mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.spec mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.spec:26: W: macro-in-comment %{qt_module} mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.spec:26: W: macro-in-comment %{snapshot_rev} mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.spec:26: W: macro-in-comment %{qt_module} mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.spec:26: W: macro-in-comment %{snapshot_rev} 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. These are fine, as they're relics of the pre-release like in qt5base $ rpmlint mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend-5.0.1-1.fc19.src.rpm mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.src: E: unknown-key GPG#9b393ae8 mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.src:26: W: macro-in-comment %{qt_module} mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.src:26: W: macro-in-comment %{snapshot_rev} mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.src:26: W: macro-in-comment %{qt_module} mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend.src:26: W: macro-in-comment %{snapshot_rev} 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. I believe the GPG error $ rpmlint results_mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend/5.0.1/1.fc18/mingw32-qt5-qtjsbackend-5.0.1-1.fc18.noarch.rpm results_mingw-qt5-qtjsbackend/5.0.1/1.fc18/mingw64-qt5-qtjsbackend-5.0.1-1.fc18.noarch.rpm mingw32-qt5-qtjsbackend.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw32-qt5-qtjsbackend.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/Qt5V8.pc mingw64-qt5-qtjsbackend.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw64-qt5-qtjsbackend.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/Qt5V8.pc 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings. Warning is fine because it depends on the parent package which does have documentation. The errors likely need to be reported upstream. $ rpm -q --requires mingw32-qt5-qtjsbackend rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 mingw32-crt mingw32-filesystem >= 83 mingw32(kernel32.dll) mingw32(libgcc_s_sjlj-1.dll) mingw32(libstdc++-6.dll) mingw32(msvcrt.dll) mingw32(winmm.dll) mingw32(ws2_32.dll) rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm -q --requires mingw64-qt5-qtjsbackend rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 mingw64-crt mingw64-filesystem >= 83 mingw64(kernel32.dll) mingw64(libgcc_s_sjlj-1.dll) mingw64(libstdc++-6.dll) mingw64(msvcrt.dll) mingw64(winmm.dll) mingw64(ws2_32.dll) rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm -q --provides mingw32-qt5-qtjsbackend mingw32-qt5-qtjsbackend = 5.0.1-1.fc18 mingw32(qt5v8.dll) $ rpm -q --provides mingw64-qt5-qtjsbackend mingw64-qt5-qtjsbackend = 5.0.1-1.fc18 mingw64(qt5v8.dll) $ wget --quiet http://releases.qt-project.org/qt5/5.0.1/submodules_tar/qtjsbackend-opensource-src-5.0.1.tar.xz -O - | md5sum af5ccb9d5ab589df03eb0b12fb5ab4cd - $ md5sum qtjsbackend-opensource-src-5.0.1.tar.xzaf5ccb9d5ab589df03eb0b12fb5ab4cd qtjsbackend-opensource-src-5.0.1.tar.xz af5ccb9d5ab589df03eb0b12fb5ab4cd qtjsbackend-opensource-src-5.0.1.tar.xz + OK ! Needs to be looked into / Not applicable [+] Compliant with generic Fedora Packaging Guidelines [+] Source package name is prefixed with 'mingw-' [+] Spec file starts with %{?mingw_package_header} [+] BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] BuildRequires: mingw64-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] Spec file contains %package sections for both mingw32 and mingw64 packages [+] Binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are noarch [+] Spec file contains %{?mingw_debug_package} after the %description section [+] Uses one of the macros %mingw_configure, %mingw_cmake, %mingw_cmake_kde4 or %mingw_qmake_qt5 to configure the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to build the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to install the package [+] If package contains translations, the %mingw_find_lang macro must be used [+] No binary package named mingw-$pkgname is generated [+] Libtool .la files are not bundled [+] .def files are not bundled [+] Man pages which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Info files which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Provides of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal [+] Requires of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal I don't think the missing GPG key is a problem, as I believe that indicates I simply have not imported it to my keychain. The 0-length pkgconfig files seem to be an issue, though. I don't see you manually installing those, so it should probably be reported upstream? Otherwise, everything looks good to me. -- 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=sMotY7oLxT&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review