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=467958 --- Comment #5 from Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> 2008-11-05 05:23:29 EDT --- Ok, it builds this time, so full review this time: MUST FIX -------- * Do not uses tabs, only use spaces, rpmlint has a good reason to complain, here is how the specfile looks in my editor (with standard 8 space tabs): Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar Source1: %{name}.desktop BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) * Put either the utils or the libs in a separate sub-package, with multilib (64 bit systems with 32 bit compatibility) both a 32 bit and a 64 bit version of the sub-package containing the libs will get added to the repository, we don't want to have both 32 and 64 bit utils in the 64 bit repository * The license tag should be GPLv2+ not GPLv2, I so no license headers without the "or any later version" language * "barry.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libbarry.so", that file should really go the the -devel package, and no the utils don't need it, the trick is to put the libbarry.so.* files in the libs package and libbarry.so in the devel package * Only documentation, not doc build scripts should be shipped as %doc: barry-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/barry-devel-0.14/www/static.sh barry-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/barry-devel-0.14/www/clean.sh barry-devel.x86_64: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/barry-devel-0.14/www/clean.sh R barry-devel.x86_64: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/barry-devel-0.14/www/static.sh R So you must not include static.sh and clean.sh here, there are 2 ways todo this: 1) rm the scripts in %setup 2) make a copy of the www dir in %build and remove the files from the copy (use this when the scripts are needed during build / make intall) and then use the copy in %doc * barry seems to out rpaths in its binaries when build on x86_64: barry.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/bidentify ['/usr/lib64'] <and lots more> Put the following 3 lines between each %{configure} and %{__make} (so put them in 3 times): # Disable rpath sed -i 's|^hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=.*|hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=""|g' libtool sed -i 's|^runpath_var=LD_RUN_PATH|runpath_var=DIE_RPATH_DIE|g' libtool * barry.spec has various directory ownership issues, all non standard dirs must be owned either by barry itself, or by a package required by barry: %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/udev/rules.d/* You should add a "Requires: udev" as that ownes the %{_sysconfdir}/udev/rules.d dir %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/* Add a "Requires: pam" %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/modprobe.d/blacklist-berry_charge Add a "Requires: module-init-tools" %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/ppp/peers/barry-rogers Add a "Requires initscripts" %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/chatscripts/barry-rogers.chat Hmm, no such directory exists on my system, better own it in the package, add a: %dir %{_sysconfdir}/chatscripts To the %files list %{_includedir}/barry/* barry-devel should own %{_includedir}/barry, so instead write: %{_includedir}/barry/ That will get you to own the dir and gets you all the files below it %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/*.pc Add a "Requires: pkgconfig" to the devel package %{_datadir}/barry/glade/*.glade barry should own %{_datadir}/barry and everything below it, so write: %{_datadir}/barry/ %{_libdir}/opensync You should add a Requires: for what ever package owns %{_libdir}/opensync * Do not package .la files, instead remove them from the buildroot in %install after the make install Thats it, with the next iteration please increase Release one and add a changelog entry what you changed, we always track changes even during review. -- 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