[Bug 744430] New: Review Request: libquvi-scripts - Embedded lua scripts that libquvi uses for parsing the media details
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: libquvi-scripts - Embedded lua scripts that libquvi uses for parsing the media details
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=744430
Summary: Review Request: libquvi-scripts - Embedded lua scripts that libquvi uses for parsing the media details Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: ---
Spec URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SPECS/libquvi-scripts.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SRPMS/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: libquvi-scripts contains the embedded lua scripts that libquvi uses for parsing the media details. Some additional utility scripts are also included.
The quvi package (already in fedora) has been splitted : this package for the scripts, an other one for the lib, and the third one for the quvi command.
rpmlint output : [builder@FEDORABOX rpmbuild]$ rpmlint /home/builder/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-1.fc15.src.rpm /home/builder/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm libquvi-scripts.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lua -> la, luau, lea libquvi-scripts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lua -> la, luau, lea libquvi-scripts.x86_64: E: no-binary libquvi-scripts.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libquvi-scripts.pc 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.
This package build on koji : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3414075
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=744430
Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |744433
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=744430
--- Comment #1 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com 2011-10-10 17:39:48 EDT --- Update : Spec URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SPECS/libquvi-scripts.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SRPMS/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-2.fc15.src.rpm
Changelog : Add the devel package
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=744430
Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2014@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pikachu.2014@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2014@gmail.com 2011-10-10 17:58:08 EDT --- Since the package contains mostly only Lua files, why not making it noarch?
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=744430
--- Comment #3 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2014@gmail.com 2011-10-10 18:10:28 EDT --- By the way, I don't think it make sense to make a -devel package just for one pkg-config file. Many packages with no -devel package provide anyway *.pc files: udev, usbutils, notify-python, etc.
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=744430
--- Comment #4 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com 2011-10-10 18:29:17 EDT --- Hi Mohamed, I did not made a noarch package because of the pc file that is installed in %{_libdir}/pkgconfig
About the devel package : I was not sure if I had to do it. I thought it was "cleaner", but if it's useless, I'll revert the changes and provide only one package.
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=744430
--- Comment #5 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2014@gmail.com 2011-10-10 18:38:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4)
I did not made a noarch package because of the pc file that is installed in %{_libdir}/pkgconfig
The .pc file should be then installed in %{_datadir}/pkgconfig/, in this case.
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=744430
--- Comment #6 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com 2011-10-11 15:22:47 EDT --- Update : Spec URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SPECS/libquvi-scripts.spec SRPM URL: http://rpms.nicoleau-fabien.net/SRPMS/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-3.fc15.src.rpm
Changelog : - Remove the devel subpackage - The package is now noarch
rpmlint output : [builder@FEDORABOX rpmbuild]$ rpmlint /home/builder/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-3.fc15.src.rpm /home/builder/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/libquvi-scripts-0.4.0-3.fc15.noarch.rpm libquvi-scripts.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lua -> la, luau, lea libquvi-scripts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lua -> la, luau, lea libquvi-scripts.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/pkgconfig/libquvi-scripts.pc 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
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=744430
Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2014@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |pikachu.2014@gmail.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=744430
Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2014@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
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=744430
Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2014@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2014@gmail.com 2011-10-17 18:56:06 EDT --- Here is the review:
+:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing
MUST Items: [+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. 0473dcfa3292f60d550d192b1b871d72 [+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. [+] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. [+] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. [+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage. [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [+] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [+] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. [+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Some notes: You could probably include the AUTHORS and NEWS files in %doc, but it's not important.
This package is APPROVED.
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=744430
Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #8 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com 2011-10-18 14:45:04 EDT --- Thank you very much for the review Mohamed I'll add AUTHORS and NEWS files before import.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: libquvi-scripts Short Description: Embedded lua scripts that libquvi uses for parsing the media details Owners: eponyme Branches: InitialCC:
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=744430
--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-10-19 08:27:36 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
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=744430
Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |RAWHIDE Last Closed| |2011-11-10 16:22:01
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=744430
Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #10 from Nicoleau Fabien nicoleau.fabien@gmail.com 2011-12-04 06:23:49 EST --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: libquvi-scripts New Branches: F16 Owners: eponyme
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=744430
--- Comment #11 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-12-04 16:02:33 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla