[Bug 542715] Review Request: RabbitVCS - Easy version control

[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=542715

--- Comment #26 from Kalev Lember <kalev at smartlink.ee> 2010-05-27 12:13:46 EDT ---
Fedora review rabbitvcs-0.13.1-2.fc13.src.rpm 2010-05-27

+ OK
! needs attention

rpmlint output:
rabbitvcs-cli.noarch: W: no-documentation
rabbitvcs-cli.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rabbitvcs
rabbitvcs-nautilus.i686: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
rabbitvcs-nautilus.i686: W: no-documentation
rabbitvcs-core.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/rabbitvcs/debug/ipython_view.py 0644L
/usr/bin/python
rabbitvcs-gedit.i686: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
rabbitvcs-gedit.i686: W: no-documentation
rabbitvcs.src: W: strange-permission rabbitvcs.spec 0777L
rabbitvcs.src:64: W: macro-in-comment %package
rabbitvcs.src:67: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
rabbitvcs.src:67: W: macro-in-comment %{release}
rabbitvcs.src:72: W: macro-in-comment %description
rabbitvcs.src:114: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir}
rabbitvcs.src:115: W: macro-in-comment %{title}
rabbitvcs.src:115: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir}
rabbitvcs.src:115: W: macro-in-comment %{title}
rabbitvcs.src:157: W: macro-in-comment %files
rabbitvcs.src:158: W: macro-in-comment %defattr
rabbitvcs.src:159: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir}
rabbitvcs.src:159: W: macro-in-comment %{title}
rabbitvcs.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://rabbitvcs.googlecode.com/files/rabbitvcs-0.13.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404:
Not Found
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 20 warnings.

E: non-executable-script is because ipython_view.py has python shebang. I don't
think it's something that should be fixed up in Fedora's rpm package, but you
can mention it to upstream instead.

! rabbitvcs.src: W: strange-permission rabbitvcs.spec 0777L
Chmod the .spec file to 644.

Other rpmlint warnings can be ignored.


+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ Spec file name matches the base package name
+ The package follows the Packaging Guidelines
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The license field in the spec file matches the actual license
+ 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. md5sum:
  861590f60bf2367a92861e44c1852b0d  rabbitvcs-0.13.1.tar.gz
  861590f60bf2367a92861e44c1852b0d  Download/rabbitvcs-0.13.1.tar.gz
+ The package builds in koji
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires look sane
n/a The spec file handles locales properly
+ Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
n/a Does not use Prefix: /usr
+ Package owns all directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ Permissions are properly set and %files has %defattr
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Consistent use of macros
+ Package contains 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
n/a Static libraries should be in -static
n/a Library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a Packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
! Packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages

hicolor-icon-theme already owns these directories:
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/actions
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/emblems

To fix that, I'd suggest to change the glob from:
%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/scalable/*
to:
%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/scalable/*/*.svg

+ Filenames must be valid UTF-8

-- 
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.