[Bug 193896] Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library

[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 report.

Summary: Review Request: libreadline-java - Java wrapper for the GNU-readline library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193896





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-09-08 00:07 EST -------
Hmm, this builds but will not install on current rawhide:

Error: Missing Dependency: readline = 5.0 is needed by package libreadline-java

Rawhide has readline 5.1; I changed readline_ver to match and it seems to be OK.  

Also, there are a few rpmlint warnings; I think it now checks for more than it
did when I first looked at this package.

W: libreadline-java macro-in-%changelog _jnidir
W: libreadline-java macro-in-%changelog _libdir
   You need to double any percent symbols that appear in the changelog, lest
they be expanded in the final RPM.

E: libreadline-java no-cleaning-of-buildroot
   You need rpm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install.

W: libreadline-java mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs
   It's complaining about a couple of tabs after Group: (use "less -U" to see
them).  This isn't a blocker.

The debuginfo package is now missing the source again.  I'm at a loss as to why
this is continually a problem, but it's not really a blocker.  Perhaps some day
someone will actually understand what's going on here.

You need to include COPYING.LIB as %doc.

Shouldn't the jar file go in /usr/share/java?  If not, nothing in your
dependency chain owns /usr/lib/java.

* source files match upstream:
   501720ddded45eaedf429b7cc356107c  libreadline-java-0.8.0-src.tar.gz
X package meets naming and packaging guidelines (non-numeric release bits).
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
X dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
X license text upstream but not included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
? debuginfo package looks complete.
X rpmlint has valid complaints
X final provides and requires are sane:
   libreadline-java = 0.8.0-10jpp_3fc
  =
X  readline = 5.0
   /sbin/ldconfig
   java-gcj-compat >= 1.0.31
   /bin/sh
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
* a shared library is present and ldconfig is called properly.
* package is not relocatable.
? owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* scriptlets OK (ldconfig, gcj-db)
* code, not content.
* javadocs split out into separate jackage.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* unversioned .so in -devel subpackage.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.