[Bug 990627] Review Request: jblas - Java bindings for BLAS

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=990627

Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |lemenkov at gmail.com
           Assignee|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |lemenkov at gmail.com
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?



--- Comment #5 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com> ---
REVIEW:

Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable

+ rpmlint is not completely silent, but its messages are harmless can be
ignored:

work ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint ~/Desktop/jblas-*
jblas.src:52: W: configure-without-libdir-spec

^^^ I advise you to use %configure instead of ./configure

jblas-javadoc.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs,
Java-docs, Avocados
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
work ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: 

+ The package is named according to the  Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (New
BSD, no advertising, 3 clause).
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.

work ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum jblas-1.2.3.tar.gz*
3061fcae0c9b2d2e5ecc1e79ca9af7f05502c4f3dd4fd9adc98bd9df1bd720fb 
jblas-1.2.3.tar.gz
3061fcae0c9b2d2e5ecc1e79ca9af7f05502c4f3dd4fd9adc98bd9df1bd720fb 
jblas-1.2.3.tar.gz.1
work ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: 

+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
+ The package stores shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's
default paths, and it calls ldconfig in %post and %postun.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
0 The package is not designed to be relocatable.

- The package MUST own all directories that it creates. Unowned directory -
/usr/lib64/jblas/ . Please either add this 

%dir %{_libdir}/%{name}/

to the %files section, or just use

%{_libdir}/%{name}

instead of more narrowed

%{_libdir}/%{name}/lib%{name}.so 


+ The package doesn't list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No static libraries.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.

Please fix the only remaining issue with unowned directory before uploading to
Fedora Git. This package is


APPROVED.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=wElrvUR4AY&a=cc_unsubscribe