[Bug 461699] Review Request: remoot - ReMoot is a remote control wrapper

Wed Oct 8 23:18:58 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=461699

--- Comment #5 from manuel wolfshant <wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro>  2008-10-08 19:18:57 EDT ---
Package Review
==============

Key:
 - = N/A
 x = Check
 ! = Problem
 ? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
 [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
 [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
 [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
 [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
     Tested on: devel/x86_64
--> see issue 1
 [x] Rpmlint output:
source RPM: empty
binary RPM:W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/remoot-0.9/README
--> see issue 2
 [x] Package is not relocatable.
 [x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
 [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
 [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     License type: Artistic 2.0
 [x] 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 is included in %doc.
 [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
 [!] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
     006430c9ee24d6645a10693c5a075c1722876e21 remoot-0.9.tar.gz
 [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
 [!] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
--> see issue 3
 [-] The spec file handles locales properly.
 [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
 [x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
 [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
 [x] Permissions on files are set properly.
 [x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}.
 [x] Package consistently uses macros.
 [x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
 [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
 [x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
 [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
 [-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
 [x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
 [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
 [x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
 [x] Latest version is packaged.
 [x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
 [-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
 [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
     Tested on: devel/x86_64
 [x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
     Tested on: koji scratch build
 [?] Package functions as described (no hardware to test with).
 [-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
 [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
 [-] File based requires are sane.

ISSUES
1. two <code> have slipped in the Requires: perl line. Please replace it with
  perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; echo $version))
2. please use iconv (plus touch -r to preserve the timestamp) to fix this. it's
cosmetic but too easy to not fix it
3. The BR for perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) is useless. You are not using it.
3. Some of the "Requires" line are not needed either, rpmbuild peeks them
automatically. Your current version of the spec leads to:
[wolfy at wolfy2 tmp]$ rpm -qpR  remoot-0.9-2.fc10.noarch.rpm
 /usr/bin/perl
 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_) <== faulty because of issue 1
 perl(Benchmark)
 perl(Benchmark) <==duplicate
 perl(Tk)
 perl(Tk) <==duplicate
 perl(strict)
 perl(strict) <==duplicate
 perl(warnings)
 perl(warnings) <==duplicate
 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1

compared with:
[wolfy at wolfy tmp]$ rpm -qpR  /var/lib/mock//fedora-development-x86_64/result
 /remoot-0.9-2.fc10.noarch.rpm
 /usr/bin/perl
 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0)
 perl(Benchmark)
 perl(Tk)
 perl(strict)
 perl(warnings)
 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1

which happens if using

 Summary:        ReMoot is a remote control wrapper
 Name:           remoot
 Version:        0.9
 Release:        3%{?dist}
 License:        Artistic 2.0
 Group:          Applications/Productivity
 URL:            http://remoot.sourceforge.net/
 Source:         http://downloads.sf.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
 BuildRoot:      %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
 BuildArch:      noarch

 Requires:       perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; echo
$version))

 %description

-- 
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.