[Bug 491570] Review Request: sahana - Disaster Management System

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Mar 27 14:35:41 UTC 2009

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


Marcela Maslanova <mmaslano at redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |mmaslano at redhat.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #2 from Marcela Maslanova <mmaslano at redhat.com>  2009-03-27 10:35:12 EDT ---
It would be nice if you put %post part between %files and %clean section.

Rpm shouldn't have any output. This must be fixed for review:
rpm -i /home/marca/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/sahana-
messy:    /usr/share/sahana/conf -> ../../../etc/sahana/
changed:  /usr/share/sahana/conf -> ../../../etc/sahana

OK Rpmlint must be run on every package.
OK The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
OK The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
OK The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
OK The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
OK If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file.
OK The spec file must be written in American English.
OK The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
OK The package MUST successfully compile.
OK Correct BuildRequires.
OK Proper use of %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly
OK Shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and
OK Relocatable package must state this fact in the request for review.
OK A package must own all directories that it creates.
OK A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
OK Permissions on files must be set properly.
OK Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK Each package must consistently use macros.
OK The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
OK If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application.
OK Header files must be in a -devel package.
OK Static libraries must be in a -static package.
OK Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'.
OK Library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1) and files that end in .so
(without suffix) must go in -devel.
OK In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package.
OK Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
OK Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file.
OK At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or

* replace the version with macron %{version}.
* it should be used macro %bcond_without selinux and %if %{with selinux} for
parts which need selinux. It's good habit to create packages which could be
rebuild without selinux.

Thanks for reading ;-)

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