https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1422555
Gianluca Sforna giallu@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(giallu@gmail.com) |
--- Comment #2 from Gianluca Sforna giallu@gmail.com --- Thanks Randy for picking this up!
(In reply to Randy Barlow from comment #1)
There are a few things we must fix before this package can be approved:
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/arduino/tools- builder/ctags/5.8arduino11, /usr/share/arduino, /usr/share/arduino /tools-builder/ctags, /usr/share/arduino/tools-builder
Does it make sense for this package to own tools-builder? If not, should we request that arduino-core provide it?
I added the directory ownership here, since I am not sure we want to depend on arduino-core; rather we will require this package from arduino-builder
[!]: Development files must be in a -devel package
You should put the header files into a devel package.
[!]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
The shared lib is arch-dependent, and so should go into %{_libdir}. Is make install not suffiencent for this package?
I am not sure which library/headers you are referring to. For the purposes of building arduino sketches I need only the ctags executable, and that has to be placed in the specific directory I am using. This is the reason of the "weird" install step.
One optional suggestion from rpmlint:
arduino-ctags.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/arduino-ctags/COPYING
You could work with upstream to correct the fsf address in the COPYING file.
I will see if upstream can fix it; btw I noticed the ctags rpm package we have in the repos has the same issue.
Spec URL: https://giallu.fedorapeople.org/arduino-ctags.spec SRPM URL: https://giallu.fedorapeople.org/arduino-ctags-5.8-2.arduino11.fc24.src.rpm