[Bug 226305] Merge Review: poppler

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226305


Jon Ciesla <limb at jcomserv.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |limb at jcomserv.net
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla <limb at jcomserv.net>  2009-11-11 11:08:51 EDT ---
Ok, on full review:

rpmlint:

[limb at fawkes SPECS]$ rpmlint -i ../SRPMS/poppler-0.12.1-3.fc11.src.rpm 
poppler.src:105: W: unversioned-explicit-provides pdftohtml
The specfile contains an unversioned Provides: token, which will match all
older, equal, and newer versions of the provided thing.  This may cause update
problems and will make versioned dependencies, obsoletions and conflicts on
the provided thing useless -- make the Provides versioned if possible.

poppler.src:106: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes pdftohtml
The specfile contains an unversioned Obsoletes: token, which will match all
older, equal and newer versions of the obsoleted thing.  This may cause update
problems, restrict future package/provides naming, and may match something it
was originally not inteded to match -- make the Obsoletes versioned if
possible.

1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

Since I'm under the impression pdf2html is long gone, couldn't his be removed?


[limb at fawkes SPECS]$ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/i586/poppler-*
poppler.i586: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libpoppler.so.5.0.0
exit at GLIBC_2.0
This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork()
context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library
function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the
error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any
state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an
actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the
situation.

Eeeew.  Is there a good reason upstream does this?

poppler-debuginfo.i586: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/poppler-0.12.1/goo/GooTimer.h
The file is installed with executable permissions, but was identified as one
that probably should not be executable.  Verify if the executable bits are
desired, and remove if not.

Fix.

poppler-glib.i586: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

poppler-glib-devel.i586: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

poppler-qt.i586: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

poppler-qt4.i586: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

poppler-qt4-devel.i586: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

poppler-qt-devel.i586: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

Not sure if this is fixable, both doc files are tiny.

poppler-utils.i586: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/man1/pdftohtml.1.gz
The character encoding of this file is not UTF-8.  Consider converting it in
the specfile's %prep section for example using iconv(1).

Fix.

10 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.


Name is good, looks like it's in adherence to the guidlines.

License raises an eyebrow.  Tag is GPLv2, but lots of files have "or later".

English, legible, etc. Source URL and md5 are good.  Builds on i586.

Mock build in process, to check BRs, but since it's the SRPM from koji, I
suspect it's fine.  I'll post the result.

Locales an ldconfig are good.  No bundled libs.  Not relocatable.  No obvious
unowned dirs, perms ok.  Install and clean are good.  Macros are reasonable. 
Code is permissible.  Docs are tiny.  There are devel packages, no static libs.
 Pkgconfig files are OK, and pkgconfig is Required. .so/.so.* setup is correct.
-devel package requires look good.  No libool archives.  Not a GUI app.  No
conflicts I'm aware of.  All UTF-8, except for the above.


So, in summary:  pdf2html, exit(), spurious-executable term, license tag,
non-UTF-8 file.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.