[Bug 494726] Review Request: Gnote - Note Taking Application

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Apr 8 01:05:21 UTC 2009


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=494726





--- Comment #4 from Christoph Wickert <fedora at christoph-wickert.de>  2009-04-07 21:05:20 EDT ---
REVIEW for d7b9eb994e87725741b728a686490131  gnote-0.1.1-2.fc10.src.rpm


OK - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package:
rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/gnote-*
gnote.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/gnote.schemas
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines. (GPLv3+)
OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual
license.
OK - MUST: The license file from the source package is included in %doc.
OK - MUST: The spec file is in American English.
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible.
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by
MD5 2a2578cc69df41bdb07c3d754c5593e6
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on
i386
N/A - 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.
FAIL - MUST: Not all build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires: dbus-devel
and desktop-file-utils are missing
N/A - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly with the %find_lang macro.
N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) 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.
OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates.
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. Every %files section includes
a %defattr(...) line.
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content.
N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application.
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: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file is properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section.
FAIL - MUST: The packages owns files or directories already owned by other
packages: %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/
OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.


SHOULD Items:
N/A - 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.
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
FAIL - SHOULD: The the package does not build in mock due to the missing
BuildRequires mentioned above.
OK - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described.
OK - SHOULD: Scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
N/A - SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase,
and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel
pkg.
N/A - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin,
/sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the
file instead of the file itself.

Issues:
- %files: you are owning all the apps folders inside %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor
- BuildRequires: missing dbus-devel and desktop-file-utils
- Requires: desktop-file-utils is not a requirement but a BuildReqiures
- Requires: gtkmm24 is not necessary since gnote already requires
libgdkmm-2.4.so.1 which is provided by that package
- Gconf2 is missing for the scriptles:
   Requires(pre): GConf2
   Requires(post): GConf2
   Requires(preun): GConf2


Notes:
- BuildRequires: libxml2-devel is pretty redundant since it is already required
by libxml++-devel GConf2-devel and a lot more.
- Consider using wildcards: %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/gnote.png
- Desktop file: remove --vendor=""

-- 
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