[Bug 727646] Review Request: link-grammar - A Grammar Checking library

Fri Aug 5 07:41:15 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=727646

Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com> changed:

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

--- Comment #1 from Niels de Vos <ndevos at redhat.com> 2011-08-05 03:41:13 EDT ---
Some details from the review for reference:
 +:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing

MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
$ rpmlint link-grammar-4.7.4-1.fc15.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint link-grammar.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/*.rpm
link-grammar.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/liblink-grammar.so.4.7.4 exit at GLIBC_2.2.5
link-grammar-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) liblink -> li
blink, li-blink, lib link
link-grammar-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblink ->
li blink, li-blink, lib link
link-grammar-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
link-grammar-java.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) liblink -> li blink,
li-blink, lib link
link-grammar-java.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblink -> li
blink, li-blink, lib link
link-grammar-java.x86_64: W: no-documentation
link-grammar-java-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) liblink -> li
blink, li-blink, lib link
link-grammar-java-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblink
-> li blink, li-blink, lib link
link-grammar-java-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.

[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match 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.
COPYING and LICENSE are provided in the source, they are exactly the same -
including one of them should be fine

[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
$ md5sum link-grammar-4.7.4.tar.gz*
e90e702a953641713a1292db20677bd2  link-grammar-4.7.4.tar.gz
e90e702a953641713a1292db20677bd2  link-grammar-4.7.4.tar.gz._src.rpm

[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
[+] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro.
[+] MUST: Every binary RPM package 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: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
[+] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release} 
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

SHOULD Items:
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[+] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[+] 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.
jpackage-utils is a dependency suggested by
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java

[+] SHOULD: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.

link-grammar looks good -> ACCEPT

Note that there is an rpmlint warning that may need to be fixed upstream. This
will not block this package, but you might want to file a bug against it.

$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/link-grammar-4.7.4-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm
link-grammar.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit
/usr/lib64/liblink-grammar.so.4.7.4 exit at GLIBC_2.2.5
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

$ rpmlint -I shared-lib-calls-exit
shared-lib-calls-exit:
This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork()
context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library
function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the
error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any
state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an
actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the
situation.

-- 
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.