[Bug 491647] Review Request: taglib-extras - Taglib support for other formats
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Mar 24 10:33:01 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=491647
Eelko Berkenpies <fedora at berkenpies.nl> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag| |needinfo?(rdieter at math.unl.
| |edu)
--- Comment #4 from Eelko Berkenpies <fedora at berkenpies.nl> 2009-03-24 05:57:13 EDT ---
I had no problems compiling and building this on F10 i386. Everything seems to
be fine except for 2 issues.
X rpmlint must be run on every package. The output:
taglib-extras-0.1-2.fc10.src.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
taglib-extras-0.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
taglib-extras-devel-0.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm:
taglib-extras-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
taglib-extras-devel.i386: W: no-dependency-on
taglib-extras/taglib-extras-libs/libtaglib-extras
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
taglib-extras-debuginfo-0.1-3.fc10.i386.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
- The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- The spec file name matches the base package.
- The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
- The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing
Guidelines.
- The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
- The spec file is written in American English.
- The spec file for the package is legible.
X The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL:
Source RPM:
d173458b0c70177a07dd2017f902bf98 taglib-extras-0.1.tar.gz
Upstream source:
c6d32e4f203768a2e4b5a83c5285f0a7 taglib-extras-0.1.tar.gz
- The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
- Package stores shared library files in any of the dynamic linker's default
paths, ldconfig in %post and %postun are used correctly.
- Package owns all directories that it creates.
- Fedora package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
- Permissions on files must are set properly and every %files section has a
%defattr(...) line.
- Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- Package consistently uses macros.
- The package contains code, or permissable content.
- Header files are in a -devel package.
- The package contains pkgconfig (.pc) files and uses 'Requires: pkgconfig'.
- Package contains library files with a suffix, base library files are in a
-devel package.
- Devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned dependency.
- Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives.
- Package is not a GUI application and does not need a %{name}.desktop file.
- Package does not change ownership of files or directories already owned by
other packages.
- The package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at %install.
- All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Needswork?:
The no-dependency-on warning for the devel-package can probably ignored as it
relies on macro's.
The md5sum of the source in the SRC RPM doesn't seem to match upstream package.
This is my first review. Any comments/suggestions are greatly appreciated.
--- Comment #5 from Eelko Berkenpies <fedora at berkenpies.nl> 2009-03-24 06:01:53 EDT ---
I had no problems compiling and building this package on F10 i386. Everything
seems to be fine except for 2 issues.
X rpmlint must be run on every package. The output:
taglib-extras-0.1-2.fc10.src.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
taglib-extras-0.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
taglib-extras-devel-0.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm:
taglib-extras-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
taglib-extras-devel.i386: W: no-dependency-on
taglib-extras/taglib-extras-libs/libtaglib-extras
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
taglib-extras-debuginfo-0.1-3.fc10.i386.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
- The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- The spec file name matches the base package.
- The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
- The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing
Guidelines.
- The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
- The spec file is written in American English.
- The spec file for the package is legible.
X The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL:
Source RPM:
d173458b0c70177a07dd2017f902bf98 taglib-extras-0.1.tar.gz
Upstream source:
c6d32e4f203768a2e4b5a83c5285f0a7 taglib-extras-0.1.tar.gz
- The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
- Package stores shared library files in any of the dynamic linker's default
paths, ldconfig in %post and %postun are used correctly.
- Package owns all directories that it creates.
- Fedora package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
- Permissions on files must are set properly and every %files section has a
%defattr(...) line.
- Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- Package consistently uses macros.
- The package contains code, or permissable content.
- Header files are in a -devel package.
- The package contains pkgconfig (.pc) files and uses 'Requires: pkgconfig'.
- Package contains library files with a suffix, base library files are in a
-devel package.
- Devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned dependency.
- Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives.
- Package is not a GUI application and does not need a %{name}.desktop file.
- Package does not change ownership of files or directories already owned by
other packages.
- The package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at %install.
- All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Needswork?:
The no-dependency-on warning for the devel-package can probably ignored as it
relies on macro's.
The md5sum of the source in the SRC RPM doesn't seem to match upstream package.
This is my first review, any comments/suggestions are greatly appreciated.
--- Comment #6 from Eelko Berkenpies <fedora at berkenpies.nl> 2009-03-24 06:07:07 EDT ---
I had no problems compiling and building this package on F10 i386. Everything
seems to be fine except for 2 issues.
X rpmlint must be run on every package. The output:
taglib-extras-0.1-2.fc10.src.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
taglib-extras-0.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
taglib-extras-devel-0.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm:
taglib-extras-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
taglib-extras-devel.i386: W: no-dependency-on
taglib-extras/taglib-extras-libs/libtaglib-extras
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
taglib-extras-debuginfo-0.1-3.fc10.i386.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
- The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- The spec file name matches the base package.
- The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
- The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing
Guidelines.
- The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
- The spec file is written in American English.
- The spec file for the package is legible.
X The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL:
Source RPM:
d173458b0c70177a07dd2017f902bf98 taglib-extras-0.1.tar.gz
Upstream source:
c6d32e4f203768a2e4b5a83c5285f0a7 taglib-extras-0.1.tar.gz
- The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
- Package stores shared library files in any of the dynamic linker's default
paths, ldconfig in %post and %postun are used correctly.
- Package owns all directories that it creates.
- Fedora package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
- Permissions on files must are set properly and every %files section has a
%defattr(...) line.
- Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- Package consistently uses macros.
- The package contains code, or permissable content.
- Header files are in a -devel package.
- The package contains pkgconfig (.pc) files and uses 'Requires: pkgconfig'.
- Package contains library files with a suffix, base library files are in a
-devel package.
- Devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned dependency.
- Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives.
- Package is not a GUI application and does not need a %{name}.desktop file.
- Package does not change ownership of files or directories already owned by
other packages.
- The package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at %install.
- All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Needswork?:
The no-dependency-on warning for the devel-package can probably ignored as it
relies on macro's.
The md5sum of the source in the SRC RPM doesn't seem to match upstream package.
This is my first review, any comments/suggestions are greatly appreciated.
--- Comment #7 from Eelko Berkenpies <fedora at berkenpies.nl> 2009-03-24 06:16:03 EDT ---
I had no problems compiling and building this package on F10 i386. Everything
seems to be fine except for 2 issues.
X rpmlint must be run on every package. The output:
taglib-extras-0.1-2.fc10.src.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
taglib-extras-0.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
taglib-extras-devel-0.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm:
taglib-extras-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
taglib-extras-devel.i386: W: no-dependency-on
taglib-extras/taglib-extras-libs/libtaglib-extras
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
taglib-extras-debuginfo-0.1-3.fc10.i386.rpm:
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
- The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
- The spec file name matches the base package.
- The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
- The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing
Guidelines.
- The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
- The spec file is written in American English.
- The spec file for the package is legible.
X The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL:
Source RPM:
d173458b0c70177a07dd2017f902bf98 - taglib-extras-0.1.tar.gz
Upstream source:
c6d32e4f203768a2e4b5a83c5285f0a7 - taglib-extras-0.1.tar.gz
- The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
- Package stores shared library files in any of the dynamic linker's default
paths, ldconfig in %post and %postun are used correctly.
- Package owns all directories that it creates.
- Fedora package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
- Permissions on files must are set properly and every %files section has a
%defattr(...) line.
- Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- Package consistently uses macros.
- The package contains code, or permissable content.
- Header files are in a -devel package.
- The package contains pkgconfig (.pc) files and uses 'Requires: pkgconfig'.
- Package contains library files with a suffix, base library files are in a
-devel package.
- Devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned dependency.
- Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives.
- Package is not a GUI application and does not need a %{name}.desktop file.
- Package does not change ownership of files or directories already owned by
other packages.
- The package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at %install.
- All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Needswork?:
The no-dependency-on warning for the devel-package can probably ignored as it
relies on macro's.
The md5sum of the source in the SRC RPM doesn't seem to match upstream package.
This is my first review, any comments/suggestions are greatly appreciated.
--
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