Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957346 Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- $ rpmlint mingw-physfs.spec mingw-physfs.spec:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 12) 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw-physfs-2.0.3-1.fc19.src.rpm mingw-physfs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filesystem -> file system, file-system, systemically mingw-physfs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US untrusted -> entrusted, trusted, encrusted mingw-physfs.src: E: description-line-too-long C MinGW compiled PhysicsFS, a library to provide abstract access to various archives. It is mingw-physfs.src:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 12) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw32-physfs-2.0.3-1.fc19.noarch.rpm mingw32-physfs-static-2.0.3-1.fc19.noarch.rpm mingw64-physfs-2.0.3-1.fc19.noarch.rpm mingw64-physfs-static-2.0.3-1.fc19.noarch.rpm mingw32-physfs.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filesystem -> file system, file-system, systemically mingw32-physfs.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US untrusted -> entrusted, trusted, encrusted mingw32-physfs.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C MinGW compiled PhysicsFS, a library to provide abstract access to various archives. It is mingw32-physfs.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw32-physfs-static.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw64-physfs.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filesystem -> file system, file-system, systemically mingw64-physfs.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US untrusted -> entrusted, trusted, encrusted mingw64-physfs.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C MinGW compiled PhysicsFS, a library to provide abstract access to various archives. It is mingw64-physfs.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw64-physfs-static.noarch: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 8 warnings. $ rpm --query --requires mingw32-physfs rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 mingw32(advapi32.dll) mingw32-crt mingw32-filesystem >= 83 mingw32(kernel32.dll) mingw32(libgcc_s_sjlj-1.dll) mingw32(msvcrt.dll) mingw32(user32.dll) mingw32(zlib1.dll) rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw64-physfs rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 mingw64(advapi32.dll) mingw64-crt mingw64-filesystem >= 83 mingw64(kernel32.dll) mingw64(msvcrt.dll) mingw64(user32.dll) mingw64(zlib1.dll) rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw32-physfs-static mingw32-physfs = 2.0.3-1.fc19 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw64-physfs-static mingw64-physfs = 2.0.3-1.fc19 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --provides mingw32-physfs mingw32-physfs = 2.0.3-1.fc19 mingw32(libphysfs.dll) $ rpm --query --provides mingw64-physfs mingw64-physfs = 2.0.3-1.fc19 mingw64(libphysfs.dll) $ rpm --query --provides mingw32-physfs-static mingw32-physfs-static = 2.0.3-1.fc19 $ rpm --query --provides mingw64-physfs-static mingw64-physfs-static = 2.0.3-1.fc19 $ wget --quiet http://www.icculus.org/physfs/downloads/physfs-2.0.3.tar.bz2 -O - | md5sum c2c727a8a8deb623b521b52d0080f613 - $ md5sum physfs-2.0.3.tar.bz2 c2c727a8a8deb623b521b52d0080f613 physfs-2.0.3.tar.bz2 + 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, or %mingw_cmake_kde4 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 The following rpmlint errors/warnings need to be fixed: * mingw-physfs.spec:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs * mingw-physfs.src: E: description-line-too-long * mingw32-physfs.noarch: E: description-line-too-long * mingw64-physfs.noarch: E: description-line-too-long * mingw32-physfs.noarch: W: no-documentation * mingw64-physfs.noarch: W: no-documentation The mingw32 package seems to depend on libgcc_s_sjlj-1.dll while the mingw64 package doesn't. I've also seen this on various other packages so we can ignore this for now A text file containing the license needs to bundled with both the mingw32-physfs and mingw64-physfs subpackages and marked as %doc The spec file still contains some informational comments from the example spec file (about the use of static subpackages). These comments can be removed Please add a comment about what the patch does and a reference to the upstream bug tracker (if applicable). Why is the 'rm -rf lzma' line commented out? If it isn't needed please remove it -- 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=zqcOTtj6Yh&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review