https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1294587 Jeremy Cline <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jeremy Cline <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxx> --- My only quibble is having: %install install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/erlang/lib/%{srcname}-%{version} install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/erlang/lib/%{srcname}-%{version}/ebin since it is equivalent to: %install install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/erlang/lib/%{srcname}-%{version}/ebin However, it doesn't do any harm so I leave it up to you to keep or remove. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: 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. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: erlang-p1_utils-1.0.2-1.fc24.noarch.rpm erlang-p1_utils-1.0.2-1.fc24.src.rpm erlang-p1_utils.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US utils -> tills erlang-p1_utils.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib erlang-p1_utils.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US utils -> tills erlang-p1_utils.src:48: W: libdir-macro-in-noarch-package (main package) %{_libdir}/erlang/lib/%{srcname}-%{version} 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory erlang-p1_utils.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Requires -------- erlang-p1_utils (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- erlang-p1_utils: erlang-p1_utils Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/processone/p1_utils/archive/1.0.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 308f84c6d0ed8dc0fb79cb9534f52aa839c3e7a5c2d22fc94d43aacf2e853523 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 308f84c6d0ed8dc0fb79cb9534f52aa839c3e7a5c2d22fc94d43aacf2e853523 -- 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