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: PyYAML - YAML parser and emitter for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426167 ------- Additional Comments From jeckersb@xxxxxxxxxx 2008-01-02 18:21 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) > About the above rpmlint complaints: > > The issue with executable documentation is that it has dependencies. > (Non-executable documentation can have dependencies as well, as rpm will > extract dependency information from perl files and such). What you don't want > is for documentation to force a bunch of additional dependencies that the > package wouldn't need at all if it were installed without that documentation. > In this case the only dependency is the Python interpreter, so that's OK, but > if that dependency makes use of modules, then you have to watch out that future > RPM releases don't gain enough Python dependency generation logic to figure > those out. > > Another consideration is that if the script is sufficiently useful that you > expect users will want to run it, you should just package it as you would any > other executable: in /usr/bin, instead of hidden under /usr/share/doc. > > You should drop the manual dependency on python; rpm figures that out for > itself in the form of the python(abi) dependency. > > You also probably want to remove the comment in the %files section as that's > just an instruction to the packager that appears in the specfile template. > > Checklist: > * source files match upstream: > 27b69bf6f1452e8f41577646ddfe78f9528a437409927d5d543bc97d75e27a03 > PyYAML-3.05.tar.gz > * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. > * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. > * summary is OK. > * description is OK. > * dist tag is present. > * build root is OK. > * license field matches the actual license. > * license is open source-compatible. > * license text included in package. > * latest version is being packaged. > * BuildRequires are proper. > * %clean is present. > * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). > * package installs properly > * rpmlint has acceptable complaints. > X final provides and requires: > PyYAML = 3.05-1.fc9 > = > /usr/bin/python > X python >= 2.3 > python(abi) = 2.5 > > * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. > * owns the directories it creates. > * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. > * no duplicates in %files. > * file permissions are appropriate. > * no scriptlets present. > * code, not content. > * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. > * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. > Thanks Jason, I have set the example to be non-executable, now the package is rpmlint clean. I also removed the explicit python dependency and removed the extra comment. New spec and srpm: http://csee.wvu.edu/~johnny/fedora/PyYAML.spec http://csee.wvu.edu/~johnny/fedora/PyYAML-3.05-2.fc8.src.rpm -- 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