[Bug 713320] Review Request: oz - Library and utilities for automated guest OS installs

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=713320

--- Comment #14 from Pádraig Brady <p at draigbrady.com> 2011-07-05 10:41:41 EDT ---
Updated srpm for review:

Spec URL: http://www.pixelbeat.org/patches/oz.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.pixelbeat.org/patches/oz-0.5.0-2.fc15.src.rpm

(In reply to comment #13)
> (new) fedora guidelines say:
> + BuildRoot is unnecessary, just get rid of it
> + %defattr, ditto
> + %clean, ditto

Done

> [ FAIL ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the 
>          actual license
> 
>  spec still says LGPL2, COPYING says LGPL2.1

I responded to this previously.
It seems that these 2 are synonymous.
If I use 2.1 in the spec, rpmlint will complain.

See: http://www.redhat.com/a-packaging/2008-November/msg00047.html
and: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing

(if you search for "LGPLv2" there, you see that it covers both LGPLv2 and
LGPLv2.1)

> [  OK  ] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
>          %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).

Note that conflicts with the request to remove %clean (which I've done)

> [ FAIL ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. - clalance: minor,
> but Source0 can be changed to use %{name}-%{version}.

%{name}/%{version} now used.

thanks!

-- 
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.