[Bug 1284255] Review Request: wayland-protocols - Wayland protocols that adds functionality not available in the Wayland core protocol

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1284255



--- Comment #5 from Kalev Lember <klember@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
Fedora review wayland-protocols-1.0-1.fc24.src.rpm 2015-12-04

$ rpmlint wayland-protocols-1.0-1.fc24.src.rpm \
          wayland-protocols-devel
wayland-protocols.src: E: summary-too-long C Wayland protocols that adds
functionality not available in the Wayland core protocol
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.

+ OK
! needs attention

! rpmlint warnings:

  Would be good to fix up the summary-tool-long warning. I'd suggest "Wayland
protocol files" as the new summary.

+ 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 license text (COPYING) is included in %license
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match the sources in the srpm
  1ee04fc828cffaf278fdc684a13981eb  wayland-protocols-1.0.tar.xz
  1ee04fc828cffaf278fdc684a13981eb  Download/wayland-protocols-1.0.tar.xz
+ The package builds in koji
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires look sane

  We don't usually specify 'make' explicitly, but it's fine to have it too if
you want to list that.

n/a locale handling
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 the runtime of application
n/a Static libraries should be in -static
+ Development files should be in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
+ Packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a Proper .desktop file handling
+ Doesn't own files or directories already owned by other packages
+ Filenames are valid UTF-8


Some other nitpicks I noticed:

> Requires:       pkgconfig

rpmbuild autogenerates a dep on /usr/bin/pkg-config and there's no need to
manually list "Requires: pkgconfig"

> %make_build

Like Jonas says above, this isn't really needed for this package as it's not
building anything.


Another thing I noticed is that now that you are only building a
wayland-protocols-devel and there's no wayland-protocols package, all the
nicely written summaries are essentially not used in the actual user visible
package -- the -devel subpackage only has a copy-pasted one line blurb. It's
also somewhat misleading to say "Development files for %{name}" because there's
no '%{name}' package.


None of these are blocking issues for the review, but please feel free to
address them before importing.

APPROVED

-- 
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




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