[Bug 675234] Review Request: duply - Wrapper for duplicity

Wed Feb 23 04:38:42 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=675234

Sergio Belkin <sebelk at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sebelk at gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Sergio Belkin <sebelk at gmail.com> 2011-02-22 23:38:41 EST ---
Hi Thomas,

I am not from packaging group, however I hope you find useful this review about
some mandatory items:

MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.

duply.spec: I: checking-url
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/ftplicity/duply_1.5.4.2.tgz (timeout 10
seconds)
duply.src: I: checking
duply.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cron -> corn, con, crone
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> Eg, eh, e
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backends -> backbends, back
ends, back-ends
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ftplicity -> triplicity,
duplicity, complicity
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.src: I: checking-url http://duply.net/ (timeout 10 seconds)
duply.src: I: checking-url
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/ftplicity/duply_1.5.4.2.tgz (timeout 10
seconds)
duply.noarch: I: checking
duply.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cron -> corn, con, crone
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg -> Eg, eh, e
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backends -> backbends,
back ends, back-ends
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ftplicity -> triplicity,
duplicity, complicity
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

duply.noarch: I: checking-url http://duply.net/ (timeout 10 seconds)
duply.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary duply
***Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.

Perhaps you contact the author to provide one man page.

2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings.

MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines: OK

MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption: 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.
OK, usr/share/doc/duply-1.5.4.2/gpl-2.0.txt is GPLv2

MUST: The spec file must be written in American English: OK

MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible: OK

MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.Package md5sum matches upstream package:
ff3b4cd496d2fe34155460005e9bb0e4.

MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. OK, it's noarch

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: OK

MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)[14]
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: OK
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros: OK
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content: OK

MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8: OK

File List:

drwxr-xr-x    2 root    root                        0 feb 23 00:42 /etc/duply
-rwxr-xr-x    1 root    root                    61737 feb 23 00:42
/usr/bin/duply
drwxr-xr-x    2 root    root                        0 feb 23 00:42
/usr/share/doc/duply-1.5.4.2
-rw-r--r--    1 root    root                    18092 ene  5 20:46
/usr/share/doc/duply-1.5.4.2/gpl-2.0.txt

I've found a file with an encoding different from utf-8

Notes:
-Encoding:
file -i ./usr/bin/duply
./usr/bin/duply: text/x-shellscript; charset=iso-8859-1

rpmlint does not complain about it, however you may convert it with iconv:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#file-not-utf8

-Tags:
BuildRoot tag is not needed:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag

-Sections:
The same goes for %clean section:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean

Hope that helps

-- 
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.