[Bug 560179] accountsdialog - An application to view and modify user accounts information

[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=560179

Christoph Wickert <cwickert at fedoraproject.org> changed:

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

--- Comment #1 from Christoph Wickert <cwickert at fedoraproject.org> 2010-01-30 19:14:31 EST ---
OK - MUST: rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/accountsdialog-*
accountsdialog.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
OK - MUST: named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK - MUST: spec file name matches the base package %{name}
OK - MUST: package meets the Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines: GPLv3+
OK - MUST: License field in spec file matches the actual license
OK - MUST: license file included in %doc
OK - MUST: spec is in American English
OK - MUST: spec is legible
OK - MUST: sources match the upstream source by MD5
c3f1931123adcf0f0dc749edb60a7d60
OK - MUST: successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on x86_64
OK - MUST: no ExcludeArch.
OK - MUST: all build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
OK - MUST: handles locales properly with %find_lang
N/A - 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: Package does not bundle copies of system libraries (see below).
N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review.
OK - MUST: owns all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: no duplicate files in the %files listing
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly, includes %defattr(...)
OK - MUST: package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
OK - MUST: consistently uses macros
OK - MUST: package contains code, or permissable content
N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application
N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package
N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package
N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig'.
N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then library
files that end in .so must go in a -devel package.
N/A - MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully
versioned dependency
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
FIX - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a
%{name}.desktop file, but that file is properly not installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section.
OK - MUST: package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
OK - MUST: at the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf
RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
OK - MUST: all filenames valid UTF-8


SHOULD Items:
OK - SHOULD: Source package includes license text(s) as a separate file.
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
OK - SHOULD: builds in mock.
OK - SHOULD: compiles and builds into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
OK - SHOULD: functions as described.
N/A - SHOULD: Scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
N/A - SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg
N/A - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin,
/sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the
file instead of the file itself.


Other items:
OK - latest stable version
OK - SourceURL valid
OK - Compiler flags ok
OK - Debuginfo complete


Issues:
- The package doesn't build against the Polkit in F12, so please add the
minimim required version to the polkit-devel BuildRequires.
- You are not using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate for
accountsdialog.desktop
- The Exec= line in the desktop file should not have an absolute path.
- Add INSTALL='install -p' to make install to preserve the timestamps of the
data files (pixmaps etc).


Notes:
- The source code is a mixture of GPLv2+ and GPLv3, src/locarchive.h is
LGPLv2+. Can this be cleaned up?
- There are files from fprint and GDM included in the source, which violates
the "No duplication of system libraries" policy. I assume this code will be
moved into it's proper upstream packages once it's mature and you will build
against these packages then, so for now this is not a problem.


Please fix the items marked as issues and consider the package APPROVED.

-- 
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.