[Bug 920856] Review Request: five-or-more - GNOME five-or-more game

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=920856

Kalev Lember <kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #2 from Kalev Lember <kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx> ---
Fedora review five-or-more-3.8.0-1.fc19.src.rpm 2013-05-06

$ rpmlint five-or-more \
          five-or-more-debuginfo-3.8.0-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm \
          five-or-more-3.8.0-1.fc20.src.rpm
five-or-more.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided gnome-games-glines
five-or-more.x86_64: W: binaryinfo-readelf-failed /usr/bin/five-or-more
readelf: Error: Input file '/usr/bin/five-or-more' is not readable.
five-or-more.x86_64: W: binaryinfo-tail-failed /usr/bin/five-or-more: [Errno
13] Permission denied: '/usr/bin/five-or-more'
five-or-more.x86_64: W: ldd-failed /usr/bin/five-or-more
five-or-more.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/five-or-more-3.8.0/COPYING
five-or-more.x86_64: E: setgid-binary /usr/bin/five-or-more games 02551L
five-or-more.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/five-or-more
02551L
five-or-more.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/five-or-more
02551L
five-or-more.x86_64: E: zero-length /var/games/glines.Medium.scores
five-or-more.x86_64: E: zero-length /var/games/glines.Small.scores
five-or-more.x86_64: E: zero-length /var/games/glines.Large.scores
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/glines.c
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-preimage.h
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-stock.h
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-scores-dialog.c
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-preimage.c
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-scores.h
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-stock.c
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-scores-dialog.h
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-file-list.h
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-file-list.c
five-or-more-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/five-or-more-3.8.0/src/games-scores.c
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 18 errors, 4 warnings.


+ OK
! needs attention

+ Rpmlint is noisy here, but most of the warnings / errors seem harmless.
  The unreadable /usr/bin/five-or-more is a bit weird, but it's the same as in
  the old gnome-games and I suppose it didn't have the r bit for a reason.
+ The package is named according to Fedora packaging guidelines
+ The spec file name matches the base package name.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
  Licensing Guidelines.
+ The license field in the spec file matches the actual license
+ The package contains the license file (COPYING)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm. md5sum:
  f1b6bed76256a6c7a76384426c7d02fc  five-or-more-3.8.0.tar.xz
  f1b6bed76256a6c7a76384426c7d02fc  Download/five-or-more-3.8.0.tar.xz
+ The package builds in koji
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires look sane
+ The spec file handles locales properly
n/a ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
n/a Package isn't relocatable
+ Package owns all the directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ Permissions are properly set
+ Consistent use of macros
+ The package must contain code or permissible content
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a Header files should be in -devel
n/a Static libraries should be in -static
n/a Library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
+ Packages should not contain libtool .la files
+ Proper .desktop file handling
+ Doesn't own files or directories already owned by other packages
+ Filenames are valid UTF-8

Looks good!

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=ETRDT1UcvK&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]