[Bug 727087] Review Request: perl-Alien-SDL - Building, finding and using SDL binaries

Thu Aug 4 10:29:04 UTC 2011

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=727087

--- Comment #1 from Petr Sabata <psabata at redhat.com> 2011-08-04 06:29:03 EDT ---
Package: perl-Alien-SDL
Version: 1.428
Release: 1.fc14
Sources: Alien-SDL-1.428.tar.gz
Patches: 
----------
Package successfully built in mock, fedora-rawhide-x86_64.
Package successfully built in mock, fedora-rawhide-i386.
Package successfully built in koji, dist-rawhide.

MUST items:
[  OK  ] Package does NOT include pre-built binaries or libraries
[  OK  ] Spec file is legible and written in American english
[  OK  ] Package successfully builds on at least one supported primary
architecture
[  --  ] All ExcludeArch tags valid, referencing proper bug reports
[  OK  ] Package obeys FHS (with _libexecdir and /srv exceptions)
[ NOTE ] No errors reported by rpmlint
[  OK  ] Changelog present and properly formatted
[  OK  ] Package does NOT include Packager, Vendor, Copyright or PreReq tags
[  OK  ] Source tags are working URLs and sources match upstream or justified
otherwise
[ FAIL ] Requires correct or justified otherwise
[ NOTE ] BuildRequires correct or justified otherwise
[  OK  ] All file names are in proper UTF-8 encoding
[  OK  ] All plain text failes are in proper UTF-8 encoding
[  --  ] Large documentation files are located in doc subpackage
[  OK  ] All documentation prefixed with %doc
[  OK  ] Documentation is NOT executable
[  OK  ] No files in %doc are needed at run-time
[  --  ] Compiler flags honor Fedora defaults or are justified
[  --  ] Package generates useful debuginfo packages
[  --  ] Header files are placed in devel subpackage
[  --  ] Unversioned shared libraries are placed in devel subpackage
[  --  ] Pkgconfig files are placed in devel subpackage
[  --  ] Full-versioned Requires of the base package in subpackages
[  --  ] Package calls ldconfig in post and postun sections for all
subpackages, if applicable
[  --  ] Static libraries are provided by static subpackage
[  OK  ] Package contains no static executables unless approved by FESCo
[  OK  ] Package does NOT bundle any system libraries
[  --  ] RPath not used for anything besides internal libraries
[  --  ] All config files are marked noreplace or justified otherwise
[  OK  ] No config files are located under /usr
[  --  ] Package contains working systemd unit files and requires systemd-units
[  --  ] All systemd unit files are named according to the Guidelines
[  --  ] Package contains a SystemV-compatible initscript only as an optional
addition to systemd unit files
[  --  ] If package contains an initscript, it's placed in sysvinit subpackage
[  --  ] A GUI application installs a proper desktop file
[  --  ] All desktop files are installed by desktop-file-install or justified
otherwise
[  OK  ] Package consistently uses macros
[  --  ] makeinstall macro is used only if make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
does NOT work
[  --  ] Macros in Summary and description are expandable at build-time
[  --  ] globals used in place of defines
[  --  ] Locales handled correctly -- package requires gettext and uses
find_lang, if applicable
[  --  ] Scriptlets are sane
[  OK  ] Package is not relocatable unless justified
[  OK  ] Package contains only acceptable code or content
[  OK  ] Package owns all the files and directories it creates, installs and/or
uses unless those are already owned by another package
[  OK  ] files sections do NOT contain duplicate files except for licenses
[  OK  ] Package does NOT cause any conflicts
[  OK  ] Package does NOT contain kernel modules
[  OK  ] Package does NOT bundle fonts or other general purpose data
[ FAIL ] Final Requires and Provides are sane

SHOULD items:
[  OK  ] The Summary does NOT end with a period
[  OK  ] Package does NOT include BuildRoot tag, clean section or buildroot
removal in install section
[  OK  ] Package should preserve files timestamps
[  OK  ] Package does NOT explicitly BuildRequire bash, bzip2, coreutils, cpio,
diffutils, fedora-release, findutils, gawk, gcc, gcc-c++, grep, gzip, info,
make, patch, redhat-rpm-config, rpm-build, sed, shadow-utils, tar, unzip,
util-linux-ng, which or xz
[  OK  ] Description does NOT consist of lines longer than 80 characters
[  --  ] Package uses parallel make
[  --  ] In case of a web application, package installs date into /usr/share
instead of /var/www
[  --  ] All patches have a comment or an upstream bug link
[  --  ] Package installs manpages for all executables
[  OK  ] Package contains check section and all tests pass
[  ??  ] Package works as expected

NOTES:
------
rpmlint issues:
 - incorrect FSF address; contact upstream about this
 - README file contains CRLF line endings; convert it to LF-only, please

requires:
 Most of the explicitly specified runtime dependencies are automatically
 picked by RPM, thus adding duplicates to the runtime dependencies list.
 There's also an underspecified dependency you should filter out.
 Please, remove perl(Capture::Tiny), perl(File::Spec), perl(File::Temp), and
 perl(File::Which) (this one is not used at all) from Requires.
 In addition, perl(File::Path) >= 2.08, perl(File::Fetch) >= 0.24, and
 perl(Text::Patch) >= 1.4 should be required and their underspecified deps
 filtered out...

buildrequires:
 perl(File::Spec::Functions) dependency is missing.
 Moreover, many of the listed build-time dependencies aren't used at all.
 They're just mentioned in the META files (e.g. Archive::* stuff).  But maybe
 I'm just missing something.

Not approving at the moment.

-- 
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.