Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458204 --- Comment #1 from Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-08-24 10:04:47 EDT --- MUST Items: OK - rpmlint is clean OK - follows Naming Guidelines OK - spec file is named as %{name}.spec xx - package does not meet Packaging Guidelines + Why does the -devel subpackage have 'Requires: automake'? The sample Spec included in the upstream tarball (packages/rpm/rpm.spec) does not have it too. + Please add a %check stanza as: %check make check According to the README, a 'BuildRequires: binutils gdb' will be needed to run the tests. + Moving the library headers from %{_includedir}/google to %{_includedir}/%{name} will break the builds of programs which contain '#include <google/coredumper.h>'. If similar Google projects are also using %{_includedir}/google, then you might not need to move the files. Otherwise, if you want to move them there are a few options: - Provide a README.Fedora in %doc as mentioned in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Summary_and_description to document this. - Provide a pkgconfig file which has 'Cflags: -I${includedir}/coredumper' - Initiate a discussion on fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx - It is better to pass --includedir=DIR to %configure instead of using the mkdir & mv dance to change the location of the headers. + No need to 'find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name "*.a" -delete' in %install since --enable-static=no was passed to %configure. + You could consider shipping ChangeLog under %doc, and putting README in the -devel subpackage since it talks about the examples and manual pages. README also mentions 'src/coredump_unittest.c' so it might be a good idea to ship this single file under %doc in the -devel subpackage. OK - license meets Licensing Guidelines OK - License field meets actual license OK - upstream license file included in %doc OK - spec file uses American English OK - spec file is legible OK - sources match upstream sources OK - package builds successfully xx - ExcludeArch is needed This library has been tested only on %{ix86} x86_64 and arm (see README), and it has been specifically mentioned that it does not work on ppc (see ChangeLog). You MUST ExcludeArch atleast ia64, ppc and ppc64. Work is on to port Fedora to arm and sparc, so you might want to exclude them as well. Once the package is approved please file a bug each for ia64, ppc and ppc64, and make them block the following trackers respectively: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=FE-ExcludeArch-ia64 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=FE-ExcludeArch-ppc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64 Also add a comment in the Spec above the ExcludeArch line mentioning the bug numbers for ia64, ppc and ppc64. OK - build dependencies correctly listed OK - no locales OK - %post and %postun invoke ldconfig OK - package is not relocatable xx - file and directory ownership + The %files stanza for the -devel subpackage is broken. It should be fixed to have '%dir %{_includedir}/%{name}'. Otherwise the %{_includedir}/coredumper directory will not be owned by the package: [rishi@ginger SPECS]$ rpm -qf /usr/include/coredumper file /usr/include/coredumper is not owned by any package [rishi@ginger SPECS]$ + It might be better not to mention the compression suffix (ie. .gz) for the manual pages. OK - no duplicates in %file OK - file permissions set properly OK - %clean present OK - macros used consistently OK - contains code and permissable content OK - -doc is not needed OK - contents of %doc does not affect the runtime OK - header files in -devel OK - no static libraries OK - no pkgconfig files OK - library files without suffix in -devel OK - -devel requires base package OK - no libtool archives OK - %{name}.desktop file not needed OK - does not own files or directories owned by other packages OK - buildroot correctly prepped OK - all file names valid UTF-8 SHOULD Items: OK - upstream provides license text xx - no translations for description and summary OK - package builds in mock successfully OK - package builds on all supported architectures xx - package functions as expected + Only works on %{ix86}, x86_64 and arm. Other architectures should be, especially ia64, ppc and ppc64, should be excluded. OK - scriptlets are sane OK - subpackages other than -devel are not needed OK - no pkgconfig files OK - no file dependencies -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review