https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1214834 --- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Škarvada <jskarvad@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Thanks for the review. > (In reply to Jan Synacek from comment #1) > > Issues: > > ======= > > - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. > > Note: warning: File listed twice: /var/lib/fbb > > See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles > > - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) > > in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) > > for the package is included in %license. > > Note: License file COPYING is marked as %doc instead of %license > > See: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text > > These should be solved. > Hopefully fixed. > > [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > > Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/ax25 > > I vaguely remember one package that had this problem as well. Is the > directory owned by another package? > Bug 1168929. > > [ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. > > The package is not primarily a GUI application, but it does have a GUI. I > leave the decision to include a desktop file to the packager. > Fixed and created simple icon :). It's not art competition winner :) but better than nothing. I will probably provide it to upstream. > > [ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package > > [ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. > > [ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory > > names). > > [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. > > [ ]: Package does not generate any conflict. > > [ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. > > [ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and > > Provides are present. > > [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. > > [ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. > > s/overrided/overridden/ in the spec, line 3. > Fixed :) > I noticed that in the fbb.service, there is: > > ExecStart = /usr/sbin/fbb -f -l - > > I believe that the last argument is a typo, and should be "-N", since it's > added by one of the patches. It's OK, "-l -" means logging to the STDOUT, the functionality is added by the stdout patch. The -N option is added by the fbb script, because it is called with the NON_INTERACTIVE environment variable set to 1. Maybe I could implement it better, but I wanted to stay consistent with other packages (e.g. uronode) which also uses this environment variable. Using the same -N switch in both fbb and xfbbd could be confusing and would require re-design of the fbb script, because the option parser is called after basic interactive initialisation, which the NON_INTERACTIVE variable tries to avoid. New version: Spec URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/fbb/fbb.spec SRPM URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/fbb/fbb-7.0.8-0.2.beta.fc21.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review