[Bug 226365] Merge Review: redhat-rpm-config

[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=226365





--- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola at iki.fi>  2009-03-28 14:42:11 EDT ---
rpmlint output:
redhat-rpm-config.noarch: W: no-documentation
redhat-rpm-config.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/find-provides.d/firmware.prov 0644
redhat-rpm-config.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/find-provides.d/modalias.prov 0644
redhat-rpm-config.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot Red Hat specific rpm
configuration files.
redhat-rpm-config.noarch: W: no-url-tag
redhat-rpm-config.noarch: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
redhat-rpm-config.src:121: W: macro-in-%changelog name
redhat-rpm-config.src:265: W: macro-in-%changelog configure
redhat-rpm-config.src:274: W: macro-in-%changelog __spec_install_post
redhat-rpm-config.src: E: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
redhat-rpm-config.src: W: no-%build-section
redhat-rpm-config.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot Red Hat specific rpm
configuration files.
redhat-rpm-config.src: W: no-url-tag
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 9 warnings.

- Fix the macros in changelog (should be %%name instead of %name etc).

- Clean buildroot before install.

- Add disclaimer from
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#We_are_Upstream to spec file.

- Remove dot from summary and set executable flags on scripts.

- Drop use of %{_prefix}.

- Change buildroot to
%(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX)

MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. OK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the 
Licensing Guidelines. OK

MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
NEEDSFIX
- Since we are upstream it should be no problem to get the license specified
and the license files included in the package.

MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. NEEDSFIX

MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. OK
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. OK
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. 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'. OK
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so 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. OK
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. OK
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK

MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. NEEDSFIX

SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. NEEDSFIX

SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK

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