Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kdebase-runtime - K Desktop Environment - Runtime https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=374531 kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-11-19 02:35 EST ------- MUST Items: ! rpmlint output: > kdebase-runtime.i386: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/icons/oxygen/scalable/export_pngs.sh 0644 Upstream's fault. Should we fix this? > kdebase-runtime.i386: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/kde4/apps/khelpcenter/plugins/Scrollkeeper/.directory NOTABUG > kdebase-runtime.i386: E: setgid-binary /usr/lib/kde4/libexec/kdesud root 02755 > kdebase-runtime.i386: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/kde4/libexec/kdesud 02755 NOTABUG, that's kinda required to make kdesu work. :-) > kdebase-runtime.i386: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/kde4/apps/khelpcenter/plugins/Tutorials/.directory > kdebase-runtime.i386: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/kde4/apps/khelpcenter/plugins/Applications/.directory NOTABUG > kdebase-runtime.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/man1/kdesu.1.gz This one is bad though. Upstream's fault, should we recode this? > kdebase-runtime.i386: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/kde4/apps/khelpcenter/plugins/Manpages/.directory NOTABUG > kdebase-runtime.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.96-0-3 3.96.0-3.fc9 NOTABUG, kinda how disttags work. :-) > kdebase-runtime.i386: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib/kde4/libexec/khc_indexbuilder ['/usr/lib', '/usr/lib/kde4/devel'] > (and 21 more like that) This is bad. cmake was recently changed not to define CMAKE_SKIP_RPATH anymore. I think we'll have to define it in the cmake_kde4 macro now (it's needed because of my parallel-devel hack). But I'm not going to block the review for that because this is cmake's and/or kde-filesystem's (and arguably kdelibs' because of my parallel-devel hack) fault, not kdebase-runtime's. + named and versioned according to the Package Naming Guidelines + spec file name matches base package name + Packaging Guidelines: + License GPLv2 OK, matches actual license + No known patent problems + No emulator, no firmware, no binary-only or prebuilt components + Complies with the FHS + proper changelog, tags, BuildRoot, Requires, BuildRequires, Summary, Description + no non-UTF-8 characters + relevant documentation (manpages) included + RPM_OPT_FLAGS are used (%{cmake_kde4} macro) + debuginfo package is valid + no static libraries nor .la files + no duplicated system libraries ! rpaths: see rpmlint output above + no configuration files, so %config guideline doesn't apply + no init scripts, so init script guideline doesn't apply + no end-user executables, so no .desktop file present or needed + no timestamp-clobbering file commands + _smp_mflags used + scriptlets are valid + not a web application, so web application guideline doesn't apply + no conflicts + complies with all the legal guidelines + license not included upstream, so can't include as %doc (see SHOULD items below) + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible * skipping "source matches upstream" test as 3.96.0 is not announced yet, and I know Rex got it directly from the KDE release team For the record: MD5SUM: 51f9ca43f8a6f6632f774f588208268c SHA1SUM: f89777026cc2e20a178b4b02a068a7f06f9418e8 + builds on at least one arch (F9 all arches Koji scratch build) + no non-working arches, so no ExcludeArch needed + all build dependencies listed in CMakeLists.txt as well as cmake itself are listed in BuildRequires + no translations in original tarball, so translation/locale guidelines don't apply + ldconfig correctly called in %post and %postun + package not relocatable + ownership correct (owns package-specific directories, doesn't own directories owned by another package) + no duplicate files in %files ! permissions: export_pngs.sh has bad permissions, see rpmlint output + %clean section present and correct + macros used where possible + no non-code content + no large documentation files, so no -doc package needed + no %doc files, so no possible issues with %doc files required at runtime + no header files + no static libraries, so no -static package needed + no .pc files, so no Requires: pkgconfig needed + no devel symlinks + /usr/lib/kde4/*.so plugins (NOT symlinks) are correctly NOT in -devel + no -devel package, so "-devel should require %{name} = %{version}-%{release}" is irrelevant + no .la files + no GUI programs, so no .desktop file needed + buildroot is deleted at the beginning of %install + all filenames are valid UTF-8 SHOULD Items: ! license not included upstream (got forgotten during the kdebase split?) + no translations for description and summary provided by upstream + package builds in mock (Koji scratch build) + package builds on all architectures (Koji scratch build) * skipping functionality test for now + scriptlets are sane + no subpackages other than -devel, so "Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency." is irrelevant + no .pc files, so "placement of .pc files" is irrelevant + no file dependencies I'm going ahead and approving this now. However: * the %{cmake_kde4} macro in kde-filesystem should be fixed to define CMAKE_SKIP_RPATH (I can do it if you agree it is the right thing to do), * we should chmod export_pngs.sh to +x, * we should recode kdesu.1.gz from whatever charset it is using (ISO-8859-1?) to UTF-8. The first one is not kdebase-runtime's fault and has to be fixed elsewhere, none of the rest is critical. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review