[Bug 436033] Review Request: mona - a solver for the WS1S and WS2S logics

[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: mona - a solver for the WS1S and WS2S logics


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436033





------- Additional Comments From rjones at redhat.com  2008-05-02 03:41 EST -------
+ rpmlint output
mona-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
mona-emacs.i386: W: no-documentation
mona-emacs-el.i386: W: no-documentation
mona-libs.i386: W: no-documentation
mona-xemacs.i386: W: no-documentation
mona-xemacs-el.i386: W: no-documentation

mona-devel.i386: W: no-dependency-on mona
  This one is caused because you've split the libraries into a 'libs'
  subpackage.  This is wrong.

  *.so should go in devel subpackage.
  *.so.* should go in the main package.

+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
+ license matches the actual package license
+ %doc includes license file
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
  47842cbed7ee11310ef9747ef0d0d42c
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
  i386
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
+ binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ does not use Prefix: /usr
+ package owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate files in %files
+ %defattr line
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ consistent use of macros
+ package must contain code or permissible content
n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ files marked %doc should not affect package
  appear to be just examples that shouldn't affect anything
+ header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
- libfoo.so must go in -devel

  *.so should go in devel subpackage.
  *.so.* should go in the main package.

- -devel must require the fully versioned base

  Depends on -libs, should depend on base.

+ packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc.
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8

Optional:

n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if available
+ reviewer should build the package in mock
+ the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures

  reviewer built it in Koji:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=592445

- review should test the package functions as described
+ scriptlets should be sane
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
n/a shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin

=========================

Please fix the -libs thing as described above.

-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.