[Bug 721057] Review Request: rubygem-sass - A powerful but elegant CSS compiler that makes CSS fun again

[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=721057

--- Comment #2 from Mo Morsi <mmorsi at redhat.com> 2011-07-14 18:30:47 EDT ---
New Spec:http://mo.morsi.org/files/aeolus/rubygem-sass.spec
New SRPM: http://mo.morsi.org/files/aeolus/rubygem-sass-3.1.4-1.fc15.src.rpm
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3200004


(In reply to comment #1)
> Initial review:
> 
> 1)  There are a few lines in there that have trailing whitespace (like
> Requires: ruby); not a huge problem, but nice to clean up.

Done

> 2)  The license is wrong; the spec says GPLv2+ or Ruby (which I know is the
> default gem2rpm output), but the actual license of the gem is MIT.
> 

Done

> [clalance at localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint
> rubygem-sass-3.1.4-1.fc14.noarch.rpmrubygem-sass.noarch: W: spelling-error
> %description -l en_US mixins -> mixing, mix ins, mix-ins
> rubygem-sass.noarch: W: file-not-utf8
> /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/sass-3.1.4/test/sass/templates/_imported_charset_ibm866.sass
> rubygem-sass.noarch: W: file-not-utf8
> /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/sass-3.1.4/test/sass/results/import_charset_1_8.css
> rubygem-sass.noarch: W: file-not-utf8
> /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/sass-3.1.4/test/sass/results/import_charset_ibm866.css
> rubygem-sass.noarch: W: file-not-utf8
> /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/sass-3.1.4/test/sass/css2sass_test.rbc
> rubygem-sass.noarch: E: zero-length
> /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/sass-3.1.4/test/sass/results/warn_imported.css
> rubygem-sass.noarch: E: zero-length
> /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/sass-3.1.4/test/sass/results/warn.css
> rubygem-sass.noarch: W: file-not-utf8
> /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/sass-3.1.4/test/sass/engine_test.rbc
> rubygem-sass.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sass-convert
> rubygem-sass.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sass
> 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 8 warnings.
> 
> I think we can ignore the "not-utf8" warnings and the "no manpage" warnings,
> but we should probably remove the zero-length files.


Both the non-utf8 and zero-length files exist that way purposefully as they are
used by the test suite. Removing them causes errors when running the tests so
leaving them as is.




> [ FAIL ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the 
>          actual license

Fixed.



> [ FAIL ] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
>          %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).

rm -rf %{buildroot} in %install is no longer needed

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag

-- 
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.