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=449037 --- Comment #7 from Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-09-19 00:30:02 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > > xx - rpmlint is unclean on RPM > > + [rishi@freebook x86_64]$ rpmlint afio-2.5-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm > > afio.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm > > /usr/share/doc/afio-2.5/script2/restore > > Ok, the afio includes upstream test scripts that have been put as example in > the documentation. What is the best approach for this type of beast: > > 1/ chmod them > 2/ put them elswhere > 3/ something else ? > > [...] > > > xx - file permissions set properly > > + The scripts in %doc should not have their executable bits set. > > Linked to the upper point. Just chmod and remove the executable bits. > > + It might be a good idea to add a check stanza and run 'make regtest' and > > 'make regtest2gb' in it. > > Is it possible to delay it after a first version of the package has been > accepted ? It is possible, but it would be better to have them during the review itself, if possible. :-) > > + According to > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps you > > should use 'install -p'. > > I don't see exactly the point here. The Makefile provided doesn't use install. Yes, but you are using 'install -m ...' in the %install stanza. You should use 'install -p -m ...' instead. > > + According to > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Documentation the > > INSTALLATION file should not be distributed. > > Well. Why removing information which can be useful ? You may then as well > remove PORTING, the lsm file, ... The INSTALLATION file mostly talks about things that should be performed by the Fedora package -- upacking the sources, configure && make, compiler warnings that our package should try to fix, regression testing, etc.. Telling this to a user, who has got the package from a Fedora repository is redundant. On the other hand, Fedora users _might_ be interested in knowing about how portable this program is. So it _might_ be useful to have the PORTING file. > > xx - sources match upstream sources > > + The MD5SUM does not match. > > Tarball found in SRPM: > > 70fd825bd8af83473eb52d140df84cc3 > > Upstream sources from > > http://freshmeat.net/redir/afio/144/url_tgz/afio-2.5.tgz: > > 8c6665e0f875dcd8e1bdb18644b59688 > > This is due to a tool I use to help me rebuild the package. Will have a look at > that as well. Please try to fix this because the packaged source tarball should match the upstream tarball if there is no valid reason otherwise. -- 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