[Bug 570842] Review Request: sugar-labyrinth - A lightweight mind-mapping activity for Sugar

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Apr 2 12:05:14 UTC 2010

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


Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+

--- Comment #2 from Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> 2010-04-02 08:05:10 EDT ---
All mostly good. A few very minor rpmlint that need to be fixed. Removal of
empty file and the tabs issue. Other that that it all looks good. APPROVED!

+ rpmlint output

$ rpmlint sugar-labyrinth.spec sugar-labyrinth-8-1.fc12.src.rpm
sugar-labyrinth.spec:6: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities
sugar-labyrinth.spec:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab:
line 12)
sugar-labyrinth.src: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities
sugar-labyrinth.src:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab:
line 12)
sugar-labyrinth.noarch: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities
sugar-labyrinth.noarch: E: zero-length
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings.

+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
+ license matches the actual package license
+ latest version packaged

+ %doc includes license file
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
  381604d0011554469f1c93884e723878  labyrinth-8.xo
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
  tested using koji scratch build
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
+ %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun+ does not use Prefix: /usr
n/a package owns all directories it creates
n/a no duplicate files in %files
+ Package perserves timestamps on install
+ %defattr line
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ consistent use of macros
+ package must contain code or permissible content
n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a devel must require the fully versioned base
+ packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc.
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8


n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if
+ reviewer should build the package in mock/koji
n/a the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
n/a review should test the package functions as described
+ scriptlets should be sane
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
+ shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or

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