https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=834747
--- Comment #7 from Julian Leyh julian@vgai.de --- (In reply to comment #4)
Could you please rename it? For example into gnat-programming-studio (to be honest, I really don't know much about a typical Ada workflow and how you are (Ada developers) usually refer to the tools you're using so keep in mind this while taking my advices).
Most other Linux distributions name it "gnat-gps". I called it "gps", since there is no other package with that name yet, and i could use %name in the spec file. I would be okay with gnat-gps or even gnat-programming-studio, but would prefer the shorter one. Would this mean renaming the /usr/share/gps directory, too?
- rpmlint is NOT silent. Except bogus messages aout spelling mistakes, could
you please explain the rest? I'm especially concerned about rpath,, executable-stack and zero-length files.
gps.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization gps.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizations -> customization, customization's, customization s gps.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization gps.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizations -> customization, customization's, customization s
Well, I took the description from the debian package..
gps.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/gps ['/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/4.7.0/adalib/', '/usr/lib64', '/usr/lib', '$ORIGIN/../../templates_parser/.build/native/release/relocatable/lib/', '/usr/lib64/xmlada/relocatable/', '$ORIGIN/../../gnatlib/src/lib/gtk/relocatable/', '$ORIGIN/../../gnatlib/src/lib/python/relocatable/', '$ORIGIN/../../gnatlib/src/lib/gnatcoll/relocatable/', '/usr/lib64/']
This should be fixed with gprbuild bug number 834425.
gps.x86_64: W: executable-stack /usr/bin/gps
I don't really know what this means, will read about it.
gps.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/gps/examples/tutorial/projects/prj1/src1.adb gps.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/gps/examples/language/language_custom.h gps.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/gps/examples/demo/matrix_handling/matrix_utils.c
These and the other zero-length files in the examples folder are part of the tutorials and examples. Should they be moved into a separate package?
gps.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gps/examples/remote/my_ssh 0644L /bin/sh
Belongs to examples, too, maybe the install routine installed it with permissions of data files. Do example scripts have to be executable?
gps.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/gps/templates/aws_web_server_blocks/js/aws_kernel.tjs
Should be easy to fix..
gps.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gps
GPS only supplies documentation in html, texinfo, pdf, and txt format - no manpage.
-The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc so it MUST be marked as %doc in the %files section. Please do.
Will add it.
0 The package DOESN'T have a %clean section, so it won't build cleanly on systems with old rpm (EL-4 and EL-5, not sure about EL-6). Beware.
Will add it.
- The package includes a %{name}.desktop file, and this file does not
installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section so please use desktop-file-validate for that.
I did use desktop-file-install, should I change this?
0 At the beginning of %install, the package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) so it won't build cleanly on systems with old rpm (EL-4 and EL-5, not sure about EL-6). Beware.
I checked, it does rm -rf it..
Thanks for reviewing my package. I hope to do better in the future.