https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1844850 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Ploumistos <alex.ploumistos@xxxxxxxxx> --- Here are the issues that were picked up by fedora-review, I will need to take a better look at a few other things as well, such as the licensing scheme, but you can work on these for now: 1. Missing BR against the compiler, I guess it's gcc-c++. 2. I think I would have gone with antimicroX, antimicroX-libs and antimicroX-devel, but I also find your separation of libantilib subpackages reasonable. I think the shared library should either be versioned or moved. Is it required in order to run antimicroX, to build the package, or is it just provided in case someone wants to build some other program integrating its functionality? When rpmlint is run on the packages, it complains: antimicroX-libantilib.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libantilib.so libantilib.so Depending on how it's supposed to be used, moving it to %{_libdir}/%{name} or %{_libdir}/libantilib/ might be the safest option. Maybe these will help: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_shared_libraries https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#invalid-soname 3. Problems with permissions: antimicroX.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/antimicroX/Changelog antimicroX.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/antimicroX/README.md antimicroX.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/licenses/antimicroX/LICENSE These three should have the executable bit removed. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_permissions 4. File and directory ownership. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/antimicroX/translations, /usr/share/antimicroX/images, /usr/share/antimicroX/icons Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/antimicroX/images, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps, /usr/share/antimicroX/translations, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64, /usr/share/antimicroX/icons, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16, /usr/share/mime, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps, /usr/share/mime/packages, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps For the directories under /usr/share/anitimicroX, I believe that changing this line in your %files section %dir %{_datadir}/%{name} to %{_datadir}/%{name}/ would solve the issue. For the icon files, you can use something like this: %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/%{name}.* 5. There are multiple licenses present, I need to verify if GPLv3+ is enough, or if it should be a mixed license or if the effective license is one of the others. This might take a while. I'll get back to you if I find something else in the meantime. -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
