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 635875
Summary: | Review Request: mawk - An interpreter for the AWK programming language | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Mark McKinstry <mmckinst> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, martin.gieseking, notting |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | martin.gieseking:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | mawk-1.3.4-6.20131226.el7 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2010-10-27 22:40:25 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: |
Description
Mark McKinstry
2010-09-20 22:48:41 UTC
- replace %define with %global see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define - Since the date suffix of the version number indicates a post-release, you can also move the suffix to the Release field: %global pver 20100625 Version: 1.3.4 Release: <X>.%{pver}%{?dist} where <X> is the usual release number to increase This way it's easier to maintain the package because you don't need to adapt the version number in several places. - you should avoid leading articles in the Summary to keep it concise: "Interpreter for the AWK programming language" is sufficient > replace %define with %global Done. > move the suffix to the Release field I spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to do the versioning but never thought of this. Thanks. > avoid leading articles in the Summary to keep it concise Done. SPEC: http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/mawk/mawk.spec SRPM: http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/mawk/mawk-1.3.4-2.20100625.fc13.src.rpm Scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2515704 Hi Mark, the package looks fine now. I suggest to add the examples folder to the package (as %doc). Some users might be interested in the sample scripts. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-13-x86_64/result/*.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. GPLv2 according to source file headers [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum mawk-1.3.4-20100625.tgz* 447e7c322fa1e58141f5085bae87351f mawk-1.3.4-20100625.tgz 447e7c322fa1e58141f5085bae87351f mawk-1.3.4-20100625.tgz.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix ... [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) ... [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: subpackages other than devel should require the base package. [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin ... [+] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. The examples are now included. Should example scripts be executable? rpmlint complains if they are so I've chmoded them to 644. Looking at some packages in /usr/share/doc on my system there's no consensus, there's a mix of example scripts being 644 and 755. SPEC: http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/mawk/mawk.spec SRPM: http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/mawk/mawk-1.3.4-3.20100625.fc13.src.rpm Scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2518773 IMHO, %doc files (including sample scripts) should not get exec permissions. I recommend to chmod them to 644. However, as you noticed correctly, there are many packages in Fedora placing executable files in %doc (even images, and plain text files like README). Not sure if this is always intentional. Your latest SPEC adds the example scripts twice. Drop line %doc %attr(644,root,root) examples/* Maybe you can also add a trailing slash to 'examples' in %doc. This way it's easier to notice that a folder is added: %doc COPYING CHANGES README examples/ > Your latest SPEC adds the example scripts twice. Drop line > %doc %attr(644,root,root) examples/* Woops. Fixed. > Maybe you can also add a trailing slash to 'examples' in %doc. This way it's > easier to notice that a folder is added: > %doc COPYING CHANGES README examples/ Done SPEC: http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/mawk/mawk.spec SRPM: http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/mawk/mawk-1.3.4-4.20100625.fc13.src.rpm Scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2518773 OK, since I couldn't find any further issues, we can finish here. ---------------- Package APPROVED ---------------- Thanks Martin! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: mawk Short Description: Interpreter for the AWK programming language Owners: mmckinst Branches: f12 f13 f14 el4 el5 el6 Git done (by process-git-requests). mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc14 mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.el4 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 4. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.el4 mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.el5 mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc13 mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc12 mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update mawk'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.el4 mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. mawk-1.3.4-5.20100625.el4 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 4 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. mawk-1.3.4-4.20100625.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mawk-1.3.4-4.20100625.el6 mawk-1.3.4-4.20100625.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: mawk New Branches: epel7 Owners: mmckinst Git done (by process-git-requests). mawk-1.3.4-6.20131226.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mawk-1.3.4-6.20131226.el7 mawk-1.3.4-6.20131226.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. |