https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259532 --- Comment #2 from Pete Walter <walter.pete@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Ilya Gradina from comment #1) > I'm not a sponsor, but I will give you some notes. Thanks! > -> out command "rpmlint feedreader-1.2-1.fc21.src.rpm": > feedreader.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US synchronisation -> > synchronization, synchronicity > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. > (The spec file must be written in American English.) Thanks. I've corrected the spelling in my local spec file. > -> Requires: hicolor-icon-theme > you should specify version at least. > Example: " Requires: hicolor-icon-theme = %{version} " I respectfully disagree. Any version of hicolor-icon-theme works and there's no reason to specify a version. > -> $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > replace with %{buildroot} Again, I respectfully disagree. These two are equivalent. There's no reason to prefer one over other. > -> make %{?_smp_mflags} > you could use %make_build I am going with the style that rpmdev-newspec currently has. It uses "make %{?_smp_mflags}". Once the default template is updated, I am happy to change my packages over as well. > -> %setup -q > you could use %autosetup Likewise as previous. > -> no licence file Well spotted, thanks. I've now asked upstream to add that, https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2015-September/214103.html Meanwhile, our guidelines say that we should only add a license file to the rpm if and only if it's included in the upstream tarball so it shouldn't be a blocker for now. -- 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