[Bug 226231] Merge Review: passivetex

[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=226231





--- Comment #4 from Michal Hlavinka <mhlavink at redhat.com>  2009-12-16 06:33:43 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2) 
> > 1) rpmlint *.spec *.src.rpm noarch/*
> > 
> > passivetex.spec: W: no-%build-section
> > passivetex.src: W: no-%build-section
> > 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings
> > 
> > please add %build section even if empty
> 
> Fixed - added empty build section..

usually it's expected to have %build section between %prep and %install 

verified

> 
> > 2)What is the LPPL license based on? It seems it should be "Copyright only" (
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/CopyrightOnly )
> 
> Changed to Copyright only - it was probably based on other distros...

verified

> > 3)Source link is not valid
> > 
> > $ wget http://www.tei-c.org.uk/Software/passivetex/passivetex-1.25.zip
> > --2009-12-10 18:37:32-- 
> > http://www.tei-c.org.uk/Software/passivetex/passivetex-1.25.zip
> > Resolving www.tei-c.org.uk... 163.1.2.156
> > Connecting to www.tei-c.org.uk|163.1.2.156|:80... connected.
> > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found
> > 2009-12-10 18:37:32 ERROR 404: Not Found.
> 
> Correct link is http://www.tei-c.org.uk/Software/passivetex/passivetex.zip - so
> added only as a comment...

I'm getting :
"""
Connecting to www.tei-c.org.uk|163.1.2.156|:80... failed: Connection timed out.
Retrying.
"""
will retry later

> > 4) Missing info for patches
> > 
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
> > 
> > Every patch in spec file should contain a comment describing:
> > * why is that patch used - for example bug number
> > * upstream information - was it sent upstream (and when)? taken from upstream?
> > was it accepted/rejected? is this patch "fedora specific" ?
> 
> Info added, 5 years old patch, no connected bugzilla, upstream is dead ... and
> will never be alive again...

verified

> > 5) wrong buildroot tag
> > 
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
> > 
> > """The BuildRoot value MUST be below %{_tmppath}/ and MUST contain at least
> > %{name}, %{version} and %{release}"""
> > 
> > The recommended values for the BuildRoot tag is 
> > 
> > %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX)
> > 
> > Btw, if used only for Fedora 10+, there's no need to define BuildRoot tag at
> > all:
> > 
> > """The RPM in Fedora 10 defines a default buildroot so in Fedora 10 and above
> > it is no longer necessary to define a buildroot tag."""
> 
> Fixed

verified

> and built as passivetex-1.25-11.fc13.  

I'm waiting for upstream's web page getting back online. If the link is
correct, I'll approve this review

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.