[Bug 726841] Re-Review Request for Rename: python-mx - renaming mx

Tue Aug 16 09:48:20 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=726841

--- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola at iki.fi> 2011-08-16 05:48:19 EDT ---
Please do the preparation of the sources

# alter /usr/local/bin/python
find mx/ -name "*.py" -exec sed -i -e 's:^#!.*python:#!%{_bindir}/python:' {}
\;

# These just have test cases and aren't meant to be run
for file in mx/Log.py mx/BeeBase/FileLock.py
mx/BeeBase/mxBeeBase/testernesto.py \
        mx/Misc/OrderedMapping.py mx/Misc/Daemon.py mx/Misc/FileLock.py; do
    sed -i -e '/^#!.*python/d' ${file}
done

in the %prep phase, not in %build.

**

$ rpmlint python-mx-*
python-mx.src: W: strange-permission egenix-mx-base-3.2.0.tar.gz 0444L
python-mx.src:73: W: macro-in-comment %{_bindir}
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/Proxy/mxProxy/mxProxy.so 0775L
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/Queue/mxQueue/mxQueue.so 0775L
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/TextTools/mxTextTools/mxTextTools.so
0775L
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/UID/mxUID/mxUID.so 0775L
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/URL/mxURL/mxURL.so 0775L
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/BeeBase/mxBeeBase/mxBeeBase.so 0775L
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/DateTime/mxDateTime/mxDateTime.so 0775L
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/Stack/mxStack/mxStack.so 0775L
python-mx.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/mx/Tools/mxTools/mxTools.so 0775L
python-mx-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 9 errors, 3 warnings.

You still need to fix the permissions of the libraries. Run
 find %{buildroot}%{python_sitearch}/mx/ -name \*.so -exec chmod 755 {} \;
at the end of %install.

**

If you like, you can also drop the %defattr lines, which are defaulted in
current versions of RPM.

**

MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. NEEDSWORK
- You are mixing macro styles. Change $RPM_OPT_FLAGS to %{optflags} to be
consistent.

MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
NEEDSWORK
- In the two years' time from filing of bug #497471, the upstream project has
changed its name.
- Instead of python-mx, this package should actually now be named
python-egenix-mx-base.
(Fortuitiously this change can now be done for free.)

MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the 
Licensing Guidelines. OK

MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
NEEDSWORK
- As noted in comment #3, the correct license tag is eGenix.

MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. OK
$ md5sum egenix-mx-base-3.2.0.tar.gz ../SOURCES/egenix-mx-base-3.2.0.tar.gz 
5db1fa864e9c239e9438bd64beed5f9b  egenix-mx-base-3.2.0.tar.gz
5db1fa864e9c239e9438bd64beed5f9b  ../SOURCES/egenix-mx-base-3.2.0.tar.gz

MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A

MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. NEEDSWORK
- Please use 'cp -pr' instead of 'cp -r'.

MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK

MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. NEEDSWORK
- Fix the library perms.

MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A

MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. NEEDSWORK
- docs is now 5 MB (uncompressed), which is too big to put in the base package.
- Put COPYRIGHT and LICENSE in the main package, and the rest in -docs.
- IMHO there's no sense in having Doc folders for single PDF files. For
example, I'd place DateTime/Doc/mxDateTime.pdf as just DateTime/mxDateTime.pdf.

MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. OK
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. Not applicable
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned, architecture dependent dependency. OK
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK

-- 
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.