https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016200 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> --- REVIEW: Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable + rpmlint is silent work ~: rpmlint ~/Desktop/global-* ~/Desktop/emacs-global-* global.src:3: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 3) ^^^ A minor cosmetic issue. Please fix that before uploading. global.src: E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Fri Apr 7 2005 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt[AT]users.sf.net> ^^^ A minor cosmetic issue. Please fix that before uploading. global.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/global.1.gz 224: warning: macro `./../../usr/src/sys/libkern/strlen.c' not defined global.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/global.1.gz 228: warning: macro `./../../usr/src/lib/libc/string/strlen.c' not defined ^^^ These two should be reported upstream (if not fixed there already)/ global.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gtags/completion.cgi.tmpl 0644L /usr/bin/perl global.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gtags/ghtml.cgi.tmpl 0644L /bin/sh global.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gtags/bless.sh.tmpl 0644L /bin/sh global.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gtags/global.cgi.tmpl 0644L /usr/bin/perl ^^^ I suppose that these files have to have shebang (they are templates necessary for a normal operation). global-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libltdl/.libs global-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libltdl/.libs ^^^ I'm not an autotools expert but looks like .libs should be somehow marked as "ignored". I think this should be reported upstream. global-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libglibc/regex.h global-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libglibc/regex.c ^^^ Just chmod 644 them in the %prep section. global-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libglibc/getopt.h ^^^ Although some other fellow maintainers insists that we should fix this, I believe that only upstream should deal with legal things. Please report upstream about that. emacs-global.noarch: W: no-documentation ^^^ Sad but true - this sub-package doesn't have them. emacs-global-el.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Elisp -> Lisp, Elise, Elisa emacs-global-el.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Elisp -> Lisp, Elise, Elisa ^^^ False positive. emacs-global-el.noarch: W: no-documentation ^^^ Likewise. Sad but true - this sub-package doesn't have any documantation. emacs-global-el.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/gtags.el ^^^ I'm not an elisp expert, but I think it's harmless. 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 11 warnings. work ~: + 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. + 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 (GPLv2 or later with some BSD-licensed parts). + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is 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. work ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum global-6.2.9.tar.gz* d8d831cbd9bac9f51598af316231290cc328e4f18dc29b58a2f2ae0fee44c303 global-6.2.9.tar.gz d8d831cbd9bac9f51598af316231290cc328e4f18dc29b58a2f2ae0fee44c303 global-6.2.9.tar.gz.1 work ~/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. 0 No shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths. -/+ The package does bundles copies of system libraries (ltdl among them) but I don't want to insist on removing them right now. Please investigate the issue and either remove these libraries (build agaist system-wide ones) or ask FESCo for bundling exception: * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Exceptions 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. + 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. 0 No C/C++ header files. 0 No static libraries. 0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files. 0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so) in some of the dynamic linker's default paths. 0 No devel sub-package. + 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. + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. APPROVED ps In the future please address all these issues (minor mostly) mentioned above. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review