https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016200
Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |lemenkov(a)gmail.com
Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |lemenkov(a)gmail.com
Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov(a)gmail.com> ---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is silent
work ~: rpmlint ~/Desktop/global-* ~/Desktop/emacs-global-*
global.src:3: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 3)
^^^ A minor cosmetic issue. Please fix that before uploading.
global.src: E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Fri Apr 7
2005 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt[AT]users.sf.net>
^^^ A minor cosmetic issue. Please fix that before uploading.
global.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/global.1.gz 224:
warning: macro `./../../usr/src/sys/libkern/strlen.c' not defined
global.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/global.1.gz 228:
warning: macro `./../../usr/src/lib/libc/string/strlen.c' not defined
^^^ These two should be reported upstream (if not fixed there already)/
global.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gtags/completion.cgi.tmpl
0644L /usr/bin/perl
global.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gtags/ghtml.cgi.tmpl 0644L
/bin/sh
global.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gtags/bless.sh.tmpl 0644L
/bin/sh
global.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gtags/global.cgi.tmpl 0644L
/usr/bin/perl
^^^ I suppose that these files have to have shebang (they are templates
necessary for a normal operation).
global-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libltdl/.libs
global-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libltdl/.libs
^^^ I'm not an autotools expert but looks like .libs should be somehow marked
as "ignored". I think this should be reported upstream.
global-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libglibc/regex.h
global-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libglibc/regex.c
^^^ Just chmod 644 them in the %prep section.
global-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/global-6.2.9/libglibc/getopt.h
^^^ Although some other fellow maintainers insists that we should fix this, I
believe that only upstream should deal with legal things. Please report
upstream about that.
emacs-global.noarch: W: no-documentation
^^^ Sad but true - this sub-package doesn't have them.
emacs-global-el.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Elisp -> Lisp, Elise,
Elisa
emacs-global-el.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Elisp -> Lisp,
Elise, Elisa
^^^ False positive.
emacs-global-el.noarch: W: no-documentation
^^^ Likewise. Sad but true - this sub-package doesn't have any documantation.
emacs-global-el.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/gtags.el
^^^ I'm not an elisp expert, but I think it's harmless.
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 11 warnings.
work ~:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (GPLv2
or later with some BSD-licensed parts).
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
work ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum global-6.2.9.tar.gz*
d8d831cbd9bac9f51598af316231290cc328e4f18dc29b58a2f2ae0fee44c303
global-6.2.9.tar.gz
d8d831cbd9bac9f51598af316231290cc328e4f18dc29b58a2f2ae0fee44c303
global-6.2.9.tar.gz.1
work ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji link above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths.
-/+ The package does bundles copies of system libraries (ltdl among them) but I
don't want to insist on removing them right now. Please investigate the issue
and either remove these libraries (build agaist system-wide ones) or ask FESCo
for bundling exception:
*
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Exceptions
0 The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No C/C++ header files.
0 No static libraries.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so)
in some of the dynamic linker's default paths.
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
APPROVED
ps In the future please address all these issues (minor mostly) mentioned
above.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.