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: rkward - Graphical frontend for R language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244597
------- Additional Comments From bagnara(a)cs.unipr.it 2007-07-03 09:16 EST -------
Here is a pre-review for your review request. As you will see, it is almost OK,
but a few of the "MUST" items need attention.
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
The output should be posted in the review.
$ rpmlint -i rkward-0.4.7-1.fc6.src.rpm
W: rkward strange-permission rkward.spec 0755
A file that you listed to include in your package has strange
permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions.
W: rkward rpm-buildroot-usage %build mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/R/library
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT should not be touched during %build or %prep stage, as it
will break short circuiting.
The first warning is easy to fix. The second one boils down to the
question: what is that mkdir for?
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
OK.
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name},
in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption
on Package Naming Guidelines.
OK.
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
OK.
- MUST: The package must be licensed with an open-source compatible
license
and meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of
Packaging Guidelines.
OK.
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the
actual
license.
OK.
- MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text
of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
OK: COPYING is included in %doc.
- - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK.
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the
reviewer
is unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to perform
a review. Fedora is not the place for entries into the Obfuscated
Code Contest (
http://www.ioccc.org/).
OK.
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the
upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use
md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this
package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with
this.
OK.
- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary
rpms
on at least one supported architecture.
OK.
- MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work
on an architecture, then those architectures should be
listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in
ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the
reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that
architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next
to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have
bugzilla entries during the review process, so they should put this
description in the comment until the package is approved, then file
the bugzilla entry, and replace the long explanation with the bug
number. (Extras Only) The bug should be marked as blocking one (or
more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues:
FE-ExcludeArch-x86, FE-ExcludeArch-x64, FE-ExcludeArch-ppc,
FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64
It works on x86 and x86_64, I don't know about other architectures.
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires,
except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging
Guidelines; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply
common sense.
OK.
- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done
by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly
forbidden.
OK.
- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default
paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. If the package has
multiple subpackages with libraries, each subpackage should also have
a %post/%postun section that calls /sbin/ldconfig. An example of the
correct syntax for this is:
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
These are missing. Yet the package installs rkward.so.
- MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager
must state this fact in the request for review, along with the
rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without
this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker.
OK.
- MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it
does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a
package which does create that directory. The exception to this are
directories listed explicitly in the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard
(
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html), as it is safe to
assume that those directories exist.
OK.
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK.
- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables
should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files
section must include a %defattr(...) line.
See the warnings given by rpmlint.
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains
rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK.
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in
the
macros section of Packaging Guidelines.
The package uses the variable style (e.g., $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) almost
consistently, with only two occurrences of %{buildroot}: these should
probably become $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This
is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging
Guidelines.
OK.
- MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc
subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's
best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to
either size or quantity)
OK.
- MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect
the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc,
the program must run properly if it is not present.
OK.
- MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
OK.
- MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
OK.
- MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
OK.
- MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix
(e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so
(without suffix) must go in a -devel package.
OK.
- MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require
the base package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
OK.
- MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these
should
be removed in the spec.
- MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section. This is described in
detail in the desktop files section of Packaging Guidelines. If you
feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop
file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
How is rkward.desktop installed?
- MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by
other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first
package to be installed should own the files or directories
that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example,
that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or
man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own
a file or directory that another package owns, then please
present that at package review time.
OK.
- MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run
rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
See Prepping BuildRoot For %install for details.
OK.
- MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
OK.
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.