[Bug 590305] Review Request: vile - VI Like Emacs

Thu Jan 27 21:21:54 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=590305

Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking at uos.de> changed:

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

--- Comment #8 from Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking at uos.de> 2011-01-27 16:21:52 EST ---
The package looks fine now. Since xvile.1 is a common manpage for xvile,
uxvile, and lxvile, I suggest to add two symlinks uxvile.1 and lxvile.1
pointing to xvile.1. But that's optional.

$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/*.rpm
vile.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti
vile.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti
vile.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary vile-pager
vile-common.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch,
mufti
xvile.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti
xvile.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lxvile
xvile.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lxvile-fonts
xvile.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary uxvile
xvile.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary xshell.sh
xvile.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary xvile-pager
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.

All warnings can be ignored:
- spelling errors are false positive
- missing manpages are expected 

---------------------------------
key:

[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
---------------------------------

[+] 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 meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
    - GPLv2

[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
    - present in vile-common required by vile and xvile

[+] 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.
    $ md5sum vile-9.8d.tgz*
    cae7e55d75f880d99b864d7057c5c89c  vile-9.8d.tgz
    cae7e55d75f880d99b864d7057c5c89c  vile-9.8d.tgz.1

[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
    koji scratch build (f15):
    http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2746539

[+] MUST: %{optflags} must be applied properly when building binaries
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. 
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package ...
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file. 
[+] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] 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: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, ...
[+] 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: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[+] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin
[.] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. 

----------------
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.