[Bug 485652] Review Request: navit - Car navigation system with routing engine

[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=485652





--- Comment #54 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov at gmail.com>  2009-10-18 06:47:44 EDT ---
Koji scratchbuild for F-11:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1752756

Ok, here is my

REVIEW:

+ rpmlint is almost silent:

[petro at Sulaco Desktop]$ ls navit-*
navit-0.1.2-0.2.20090918svn2578.fc11.ppc.rpm 
navit-debuginfo-0.1.2-0.2.20090918svn2578.fc11.ppc.rpm 
navit-graphics-qt-0.1.2-0.2.20090918svn2578.fc11.ppc.rpm 
navit-graphics-sdl-0.1.2-0.2.20090918svn2578.fc11.ppc.rpm
[petro at Sulaco Desktop]$ rpmlint navit-*
navit-graphics-qt.ppc: W: no-documentation
navit-graphics-sdl.ppc: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[petro at Sulaco Desktop]$

These two warnings can be safely ignored.

+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.

+/- The package meets the Packaging Guidelines, except the following

1. The package contains *.la files. Please, remove them.
2. You dont use parallel make - please, add not, that this package can't be
build with parallel make or enable it.
3. I advice you to provide README.Fedora as the Source{X}, instead of creating
it in spec. Since it doesn't contain mutable parts (such as %{libdir}), then no
need to create every rebuild (this also reduces size of spec to review).
4. I don't fully understand what is "graphics" and how it differs from "gui"
and "osd" (which also GUI, if I understood correctly). Could you, please,
explain what is it?
5. The package doesn't own /etc/navit dir. See note below.

+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines .
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.

- MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc. Please, add the following files as %doc:

COPYING
COPYRIGHT
GPL-2
LGPL-2

+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source. I cannot
compare with md5sum/sha256sum, but after diffing I found no changes (except in
one datafile).
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji link above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
+ The spec file handles locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang
macro.

- The package must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. Unfortunately, navit
contains large parts from some packages, available in Fedora. Please, remove
them before building (at %prep stage). Namely:

* 'navit/support' directory is full of duplicated libraries.
* 'navit/map/shapefile' contains parts of shapelib
* 'navit/map/poi_geodownload' contains mdbtools
* it also contains librafy for operations with fibonnaci numbers under
'navit/fib-1.1' directory, but it seems that it wasn't included in Fedora yet,
so it's safe to keep it.

- The package must own all directories that it creates. Please, add /etc/navit
as %dir.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.

- The package must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. See my note above.

+ The package includes a %{name}.desktop file.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+  At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ All filenames in the package are valid UTF-8.

Please, fix/comment my notes, and I'll continue.

-- 
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.