[Bug 526055] Review Request: alure - AL Utilities REtooled

Thu Oct 1 18:48:04 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=526055

Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking at uos.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |martin.gieseking at uos.de
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |martin.gieseking at uos.de
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #3 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking at uos.de>  2009-10-01 14:48:02 EDT ---
Here is my review of your package. I only found a few minor issues to be fixed.
The -devel package should get its own license tag since GPLv2+ of NaturalDocs
applies to the -devel package only.
Additionally, some further suggestions:

- The tarball contains two example files that could help developers to
  understand how to use the library. You should add the folder examples/ to the
-devel package.

- I recommend to explicitly list the name of the include directory since it's
easier to see where the header files go:
%{_includedir}/AL/

- please add a blank line between the changelog entries

$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-11-x86_64/result/alure-*
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

---------------------------------
keys used in following checklist:

[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
---------------------------------

[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.

[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.

[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.

[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
    - files in tarball and the website indicate LGPLv2
    - according to the link given above, LGPLv2+ is intended
    - tarball contains files from NaturalDocs which is licensed under GPLv2+  
    - website of NaturalDocs links to GPLv3+ license text

[X] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
    - the base package is licensed under LGPLv2+ only
    - the devel package contains the NaturalDocs files, so that its own license
tag should be "LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+"

[+] MUST: file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be
included in %doc.
    - COPYING added to %doc

[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.

[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.

[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
    $ sha1sum alure-1.0-src.tar.bz2*
    ec97ff5d418b8e1fd89b8c056b9ea22c98671b65  alure-1.0-src.tar.bz2
    ec97ff5d418b8e1fd89b8c056b9ea22c98671b65  alure-1.0-src.tar.bz2.1

[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
    koji scratch build: 
    https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1722519

[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, ...

[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.

[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
    - no locales 

[+] 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.

[.] 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. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
    - not relocatable

[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. 

[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.

[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.

[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}.

[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.

[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.

[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
    - NaturalDocs documentation of the library placed in -devel package

[+] MUST: files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.

[+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.

[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
    - no static libraries built

[+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'

[+] 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.
    libalure.so added to -devel package

[+] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}

[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
    - .la files removed in %install section

[.] MUST: GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file.
    - no GUI

[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
    - directory %{_includedir}/AL/ is also owned by openal-devel
    - this is OK according to
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership

[+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot}.

[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

[X] 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.
    - upstream should be ask to include the GPLv2 license text needed for the
NaturalDocs files

[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
    - builds in mock

[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
    - builds in koji

[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. 
    - the examples coming with the tarball build and work as expected

[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.

[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.

[+] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) should be placed in a -devel pkg.

-- 
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.