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=454668 --- Comment #1 from Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-16 07:45:54 EDT --- Missing BuildRequires on vala-tools (for vapigen). After that it fails to build: make[2]: Entering directory `/home/rjones/rpmbuild/BUILD/gupnp-vala-0.2/tests' VALAC test-publisher VALAC server-test VALAC proxy-test VALAC browsing-test VALAC test-browser server-test.vala:80.9-80.41: error: use of possibly unassigned local variable `filter' make[2]: *** [server-test] Error 1 make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... /tmp/ccmQDEmL.o: In function `test_browsing_test_main': browsing-test.c:(.text+0xb1): undefined reference to `g_thread_init' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status error: cc exited with status 256 make[2]: *** [browsing-test] Error 1 /tmp/ccA2KrmW.o: In function `test_proxy_test_main': proxy-test.c:(.text+0x6b): undefined reference to `g_thread_init' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status error: cc exited with status 256 make[2]: *** [proxy-test] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/rjones/rpmbuild/BUILD/gupnp-vala-0.2/tests' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/rjones/rpmbuild/BUILD/gupnp-vala-0.2' make: *** [all] Error 2 ? rpmlint output ? 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 a7b78c99346ac4dd79847a060ac3cfd8 ? package successfully builds on at least one architecture ? ExcludeArch bugs filed ? BuildRequires list all build dependencies ? %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 ? large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage ? files marked %doc should not affect package ? header files should be in -devel ? static libraries should be in -static ? packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig' ? libfoo.so must go in -devel ? -devel must require the fully versioned base ? packages should not contain libtool .la files ? 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: ? if there is no license file, packager should query upstream ? 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 ? review should test the package functions as described ? scriptlets should be sane ? pkgconfig files should go in -devel ? shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin -- 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