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: mona - a solver for the WS1S and WS2S logics https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436033 ------- Additional Comments From rjones@xxxxxxxxxx 2008-05-02 03:41 EST ------- + rpmlint output mona-devel.i386: W: no-documentation mona-emacs.i386: W: no-documentation mona-emacs-el.i386: W: no-documentation mona-libs.i386: W: no-documentation mona-xemacs.i386: W: no-documentation mona-xemacs-el.i386: W: no-documentation mona-devel.i386: W: no-dependency-on mona This one is caused because you've split the libraries into a 'libs' subpackage. This is wrong. *.so should go in devel subpackage. *.so.* should go in the main package. + package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines + specfile name matches the package base name + package should satisfy packaging guidelines + license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora + license matches the actual package license + %doc includes license file + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible + upstream sources match sources in the srpm 47842cbed7ee11310ef9747ef0d0d42c + package successfully builds on at least one architecture i386 n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed + BuildRequires list all build dependencies n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/* + binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun + does not use Prefix: /usr + package owns all directories it creates + no duplicate files in %files + %defattr line + %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT + consistent use of macros + package must contain code or permissible content n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage + files marked %doc should not affect package appear to be just examples that shouldn't affect anything + header files should be in -devel n/a static libraries should be in -static n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig' - libfoo.so must go in -devel *.so should go in devel subpackage. *.so.* should go in the main package. - -devel must require the fully versioned base Depends on -libs, should depend on base. + packages should not contain libtool .la files n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file + packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages + %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc. + filenames must be valid UTF-8 Optional: n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if available + reviewer should build the package in mock + the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures reviewer built it in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=592445 - review should test the package functions as described + scriptlets should be sane n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel n/a shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin ========================= Please fix the -libs thing as described above. -- 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