Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 199968
Summary: | Review Request: xdg-utils - Basic desktop integration functions | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Rex Dieter <rdieter> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Laurent Rineau <laurent.rineau__fedora> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | laurent.rineau__fedora |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-07-27 11:32:22 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Rex Dieter
2006-07-24 17:08:39 UTC
Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/xdg-utils.spec SRPM URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/xdg-utils-1.0-0.3.20060721.src.rpm %changelog * Mon Jul 24 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 1.0-0.3.20060721 - 20060721 snapshot - optgnome.patch * Mon Jul 24 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 1.0-0.2.beta1 - Requires: desktop-file-utils Hi, Here a review. Please note that this is not an official review; because I'm not yet sponsored. MUST items: * rpmlint check -- rpmlint gives a warning on srpm. You'll need to fix it: W: xdg-utils mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. * Per Naming Guidelines, you should rename the spec to xdg-utils.spec * dist tag is not present. You must add it. * The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. * The package is licensed with an open-source compatible license GPL. * This package includes License file LICENSE. * The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. md5sum is correct fde4bf35fc34c58faa562bfb96103eb5. * This package successfully compiled and built into binary rpms for i386 architecture. * This package did not containd any ExcludeArch. * This package owns all directories that it creates. * This package did not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. * Please use %{name} macro in Source0, and possibly in more places. * You must use make %{?smp_flags} instead of make in %build part. * This package have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT * Doc files are present: ChangeLog LICENSE README TODO * Package is not relocatable. * The permissions of installed files look correct. * There are no .la libtool archives in the package. * Source URL is correct. * BuildRoot line meets guidelines. Also, I think you should clean up the spec -- it looks messy. Regards, Devrim Hi again, Please ignore my comment about the name of the spec file. Sorry. Regards, Devim > Also, I think you should clean up the spec -- it looks messy.
How so? (It looks clean to me).
Here is a review. I have voluntarily not read the previous review. *MUST: rpmlint output on src.rpm is "W: xdg-utils mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs" There is one TAB in the "Name:" tag. *SHOULD: Naming and version are ok, but you should add the dist tag to the release number. *OK: spec file name *MUST: packaging guidelines -MUST: do not use %makeinstall, but DESTDIR instead (seems that the 20060721 tarball supports DESTDIR). *OK: license ok, license file in doc *OK: legible spec file. I do not understand either the remark of Devrim in comment #3 *OK: upstream sources have same md5sum: fde4bf35fc34c58faa562bfb96103eb5 *OK: noarch package *OK: no locales *OK: no shared libraries *OK: correct %files *OK: permissions *OK: %clean section *SHOULD: maybe add a %check section Summary: Rex, please correct the Name: tag, and the %install stuff, and this package will be accepted. Sorry. I go too fast. Revert to FE-REVIEW. Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/xdg-utils.spec SRPM URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/xdg-utils-1.0- 0.4.20060721.src.rpm %changelog * Wed Jul 26 2006 Rex Dieter <rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net> 1.0-0.4.20060721 - specfile cosmetics, tabs -> spaces - %%makeinstall -> make install DESTDIR=... I'll add a %check section when the test suite actually works. (: Well, this package seems a good candidate for Fedora Extras. FE-ACCEPT. Forget the %check section. I have eventually tried it, and it seems to be an interactive test suite. Thanks, importing... |