[Bug 584090] Review Request: mashpodde - mashpodder is a podcatching client based on BashPodder

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Apr 23 07:15:45 UTC 2010


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=584090

--- Comment #5 from Mohammed Imran <imranceh at gmail.com> 2010-04-23 03:15:41 EDT ---
This is a informal review.

Package Review
===============

Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated


=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===

[!] rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review

Rpmlint output :

[imran at localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint mashpodder.spec
../SRPMS/mashpodder-svn25-1.src.rpm 
../RPMS/noarch/mashpodder-svn25-1.noarch.rpm 

mashpodder.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
SHOULD use rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT

mashpodder.src: W: summary-not-capitalized podcatching client based on
BashPodder
Use Podcatching instead of podcatching

mashpodder.src: W: non-standard-group 
See /usr/share/doc/rpm-*/GROUPS

mashpodder.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
mashpodder.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized podcatching client based on
BashPodder
mashpodder.noarch: W: non-standard-group Unspecified
mashpodder.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog svn25 ['svn25-1',
'svn25-1']
Contact upstream 
see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#NonNumericRelease

mashpodder.noarch: W: no-documentation
see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#no-documentation

mashpodder.noarch: E: subdir-in-bin /usr/bin/mashpodder/mashpodder.sh
mashpodder.noarch: E: subdir-in-bin /usr/bin/mashpodder/parse_enclosure.xsl
mashpodder.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/bin/mashpodder/parse_enclosure.xsl
mashpodder.noarch: E: subdir-in-bin
/usr/bin/mashpodder/sample-wrapper-for-cron.sh
mashpodder.noarch: E: subdir-in-bin /usr/bin/mashpodder/mp.conf
mashpodder.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/bin/mashpodder/mp.conf
There shouldnt be a Directory in /bin
mp.conf,parse_enclosure.xsl should be in /home/mashpdder

mashpodder.sh Line 14-26
# BASEDIR: Location of podcast directories
BASEDIR=$HOME/podcasts

# DATESTRING: Valid date format for date-based archiving.  Default is
# '%Y%m%d'.  Can be changed to other valid formats.  See man date.
DATESTRING='%Y%m%d'

#RSSFILE: Default is 'mp.conf.'  Can be changed to another file name.
RSSFILE=$BASEDIR/mp.conf

#PARSE_ENCLOSURE: Location of parse_enclosure.xsl file.
PARSE_ENCLOSURE=$BASEDIR/parse_enclosure.xsl

2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 8 warnings.

See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues

[!] The package must be named according to the  Package Naming Guidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#NonNumericRelease

[x] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines
[x] The spec file must be written in American English
[x] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL
MD5SUM this package    :43f7582097d42b8eeb6b15d98bd89f23
MD5SUM upstream package:43f7582097d42b8eeb6b15d98bd89f23
[x] The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture
[x] 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 is included in %doc.
[-] The spec file MUST handle locales properly
[-] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries
[x] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings
[x] Each package must consistently use macros
[!] Permissions on files must be set properly
755 for mp.conf parse_enclosure.xsl ?

-- 
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