https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385244 --- Comment #5 from VincentS <vincent@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Don't worry Mathieu, so here is an informal review for pew package. REVIEW: + OK - NA X ISSUE + Package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + Spec file matches base package name. + Spec has consistant macro usage. + Meets Packaging Guidelines. + License + License field in spec matches + License file included in package + Spec in American English + Spec is legible. + Sources match upstream sha256sum: $ sha256sum -b ~/pew-0.1.26.tar.gz ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/pew-0.1.26.tar.gz 0e52051393777ebf93b6ed883a049b615e0555978a578b682043f69c7ea8a6bb */opt/builder//pew-0.1.26.tar.gz 0e52051393777ebf93b6ed883a049b615e0555978a578b682043f69c7ea8a6bb */opt/builder//rpmbuild/SOURCES/pew-0.1.26.tar.gz - Package needs ExcludeArch + BuildRequires correct - Spec handles locales/find_lang - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. + Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. + Package is code or permissible content. - Doc subpackage needed/used. + Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig - .so files in -devel subpackage. - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} - .la files are removed. - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file + Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. + Package has no duplicate files in %files. + Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. + Package owns all the directories it creates. X Rpmlint output: 3 errors. $ rpmlint SPECS/pew.spec /var/lib/mock/fedora-26-x86_64/result/pew-0.1.26-1.fc26.src.rpm /var/lib/mock/fedora-26-x86_64/result/pew-0.1.26-1.fc26.noarch.rpm SPECS/pew.spec:12: W: unversioned-explicit-provides python-%{name} SPECS/pew.spec:13: W: unversioned-explicit-provides python3-%{name} pew.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Virtualenvs -> Virtual pew.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zsh -> sh, ssh, ash pew.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US powershell -> power shell, power-shell, powers hell pew.src:12: W: unversioned-explicit-provides python-%{name} pew.src:13: W: unversioned-explicit-provides python3-%{name} pew.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Virtualenvs -> Virtual pew.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zsh -> sh, ssh, ash pew.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US powershell -> power shell, power-shell, powers hell pew.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pew/pew.py /usr/bin/env python pew.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pew/pew.py 644 /usr/bin/env python pew.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/pew/shell_config/complete_deploy /usr/bin/env python pew.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pew 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 11 warnings. + final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: + Should build in mock. + Should build on all supported archs - Should function as described. - Should have sane scriptlets. - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. + Should have dist tag + Should package latest version - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews) Issues : - I think, I remember that it's forbidden to use this shebang in Fedora package : /usr/bin/env python For me, you may just resolve rpmlint issues otherwise all the rest is ok. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
