[Bug 491758] Review Request: mingw32-opensc - MingGW Windows OpenSC library

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=491758


Thomas Sailer <t.sailer at alumni.ethz.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |t.sailer at alumni.ethz.ch




--- Comment #4 from Thomas Sailer <t.sailer at alumni.ethz.ch>  2009-04-17 09:24:57 EDT ---
Fedora review mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11.src.rpm 2008-04-17

Another scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1303992

rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint mingw32-opensc-0.11.7-2.fc12.src.rpm
mingw32-opensc-0.11.7-2.fc12.noarch.rpm mingw32-opensc.spec
mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: file-in-usr-marked-as-conffile
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/etc/opensc.conf
mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/sbin/opensc-install.bat
mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/sbin/opensc-install.bat
mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/bin/cardos-info.bat
mingw32-opensc.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/bin/cardos-info.bat
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 0 warnings.

As per Packaging/MinGW, these errors can be ignored (counting .bat files as
"windows executables").

+ OK
! needs attention


+ rpmlint output
+ Package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ Specfile name matches the package base name
+ Package follows the Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ License meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
  LGPLv2+
+ License matches the actual package license
  It is also the same as in the corresponding Fedora libxml++ package
+ The package contains the license file (COPYING)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm
419e9be372c2f9bbb3ce9704c929d5ec  opensc-0.11.7.tar.gz
419e9be372c2f9bbb3ce9704c929d5ec  ../SOURCES/opensc-0.11.7.tar.gz

n/a Package builds in mock
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a 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
+ %files has %defattr
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Consistent use of macros
+ Package must contain code or permissible content
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a Header files should be in -devel
    Fedora MinGW guidelines allow headers in main package
n/a Static libraries should be in -static
+ Packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a Packages should not contain libtool .la files
    Fedora MinGW guidelines allow .la files
n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ Packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Filenames must be valid UTF-8
! use %global instead of %define

-- 
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.