[Bug 456273] Review Request: beansbinding - Beans Binding (JSR 295) reference implementation
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Aug 27 15:47:54 UTC 2008
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=456273
--- Comment #5 from Lillian Angel <langel at redhat.com> 2008-08-27 11:47:52 EDT ---
- No rpmlint errors:
$ rpmlint -i /notnfs/langel/rpm/RPMS/noarch/beansbinding-*
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Using http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines to do the review.
Those marked with an "X" need attention.
* 1 Packaging Guidelines
o 1.1 Naming
ok
o 1.2 Legal
ok
o 1.3 No inclusion of pre-built binaries or libraries
none.
o 1.4 Writing a package from scratch
ok
o 1.5 Modifying an existing package
n/a
o 1.6 Filesystem Layout
ok
o 1.7 Use rpmlint
no errors.
o 1.8 Changelogs
oke
o 1.9 Tags
ok
o 1.10 BuildRoot tag
ok
o 1.11 Requires
ok
o 1.12 BuildRequires
ok
o 1.13 Summary and description
ok
o 1.14 Encoding
ok
o 1.15 Documentation
ok
o 1.16 Compiler flags
ok
o 1.17 Debuginfo packages
n/a
o 1.18 Exclusion of Static Libraries
n/a
o 1.19 Duplication of system libraries
n/a
o 1.20 Beware of Rpath
n/a
o 1.21 Configuration files
n/a
o 1.22 Initscripts
n/a
o 1.23 Desktop files
n/a
o 1.24 Macros
ok
o 1.25 Handling Locale Files
n/a
o 1.26 Timestamps
n/a
o 1.27 Parallel make
n/a
o 1.28 Scriptlets requirements
n/a
o 1.29 Running scriptlets only in certain situations
n/a
o 1.30 Scriplets are only allowed to write in certain directories
n/a
o 1.31 Conditional dependencies
n/a
o 1.32 Build packages with separate user accounts
n/a
o 1.33 Relocatable packages
n/a
o 1.34 Code Vs Content
ok
o 1.35 File and Directory Ownership
ok
o 1.36 Users and Groups
ok
o 1.37 Web Applications
ok
o 1.38 Conflicts
ok
o 1.39 No External Kernel Modules
n/a
o 1.40 No Files or Directories under /srv
n/a
o 1.41 Application Specific Guidelines
n/a
Using http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines :
MUST Items:
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
done
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
done
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on Package Naming Guidelines
.
done
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
done
- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
done
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
done
- 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.
done
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
done
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
done
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
done
- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
done on i386.
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
done
- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
n/a
- 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.
n/a
- MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
n/a
- 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. Refer to the Guidelines for examples.
ok
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
ok
- 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.
ok
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} ( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ).
ok
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines .
ok
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines .
ok
- MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
n/a
- MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
n/a
- MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
n/a
- MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a
- 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.
n/a
- MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
ok
- MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
ok
- 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.
n/a
- MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. T
ok
- MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ). See Prepping BuildRoot For %install for details.
ok
- MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
ok
SHOULD Items:
- SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
it is there.
- SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should
contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
n/a
- SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See
MockTricks for details on how to do this.
done
- SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague,
and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity.
n/a
- SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package
using a fully versioned dependency.
n/a
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
More information about the package-review
mailing list