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: squeeze - A modern and advanced archive manager for the Xfce Desktop Environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433174 ------- Additional Comments From fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-02-19 22:46 EST ------- FAIL: rpmlint $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64/result/squeeze-* squeeze.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/squeeze-0.2.2/TODO squeeze.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/squeeze ['/usr/lib64'] Not sure if the rpath also appears on i386, cannot test atm. Do you see the same or is it just me? OK - MUST: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK - MUST: Spec file name matches base package %{name} OK - MUST: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines OK - MUST: The package is licensed GPLv2+ and meets the Licensing Guidelines. OK - MUST: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license OK - MUST: License from source is included in %doc. OK - MUST: Spec is written in American English. OK - MUST: Spec file is legible. OK - MUST: Sources matches upstream by md5 36b326e1ff4592ef4bffd2b75e171ead OK - MUST: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on x86_64 OK - MUST: no known exclude archs FAIL - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, but libxfce4util should be libxfce4util-devel. Will be installed anyway by Thunar-devel -> exo-devel -> libxfce4util-devel OK - MUST: Spec file handles locales properly with %find_lang OK - MUST: ldconfig correctly called in %post and %postun for libsqueeze OK - MUST: Package is not relocatable OK - MUST: Package owns all directories that it creates (none) OK - MUST: No duplicate files in the %files listing OK - MUST: Permissions on files are be set properly, valid %defattr OK - MUST: Valid %clean section present OK - MUST: Use of macros is consistent as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines OK - MUST: Package contains code, no content. OK - MUST: No large documentation OK - MUST: docs don't affect the runtime of the app OK - MUST: Headers are in -devel package. OK - MUST: No static libraries OK - MUST: -devel package correctly requires pkgconfig OK - MUST: libsqueeze*.so is in -devel package OK - MUST: -devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned dependency OK - MUST: Package does not contain libtool archives OK - MUST: Includes a %{name}.desktop file, that is properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. OK - MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK - MUST: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT called at beginning of %install. OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm package are valid UTF-8. OK - SHOULD: builds in mock FAIL - SHOULD: package does not function as described. I see excessive CPU usage when adding files to archives. Even a small text file in a new archive nearly freezes my computer. OK - SHOULD: scriptlets are sane. Hints: You could change %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps/squeeze.png %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/squeeze.png to %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/squeeze.png maybe the decide to include more sizes later also you could configure with --disable-static instead of removing the *.a file I see three blockers, the rest is ok. I don't care about the TODO. Does squeeze need additional programs (gzip, tar, unzip, zip) or is everything performed through libsqueeze? -- 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