[Bug 683150] Review Request: yad - Display graphical dialogs from shell scripts or command line

[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=683150

--- Comment #10 from Elder Marco <eldermarco at gmail.com> 2011-06-26 22:14:59 EDT ---
Hi Christoph, thanks for your review.

SPEC URL:
http://eldermarco.fedorapeople.org/files/specs/yad.spec

SRPM URL:
http://eldermarco.fedorapeople.org/files/srpms/yad-0.12.3-2.fc15.src.rpm

> 
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > - The URL is correct. I don't know why this happens..
> 
> It's a bug in rpmlint and happens to all googlecode projects. spectool works
> fine:
> 
Thanks.

> FIX - MUST: License field in spec file does not match the actual license: If
> you look into the headers of the source code you will see "or (at your option)
> any later version." This means GPLv3+ rather than GPLv3

Fixed. Now, the license field is GPLv3+

> FIX - MUST: spec is legible: it is legible, but could be a little better.
>   -- Please only indent lines if a command from the previous line continues.
> Lines 47, 51, 53, 55 and 65 should not be indented.
>   -- Line 45 is indented with 8 spaces, other only use 4. Please use the same
> indention all the time.
>   -- Please use the full length of a line for the description, up to 80
> characters

Fixed. 

> Well... - SHOULD: package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
> %{buildroot}.
Added clean section again

> 
> Things that need fixing:
> 
> - You don't need no yad-devel package. Drop the m4 file and move the
> icon-browser to the base package.
There's no yad-devel now.

> - Please don't use macros for simple things like %{__rm} or %{__make}. You
> never know if/how they are defined.
Fixed. Using rm, make, etc instead %{__rm}, %{__make}, etc.

> - The file AUTHORS needs to be in %doc
Added.

> - Don't specify the manpage with extension. We might switch from gz to another
> compression method. %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.* is fine.
Fixed.

> Things that should eventually be fixed:
> 
> - Bring back BuildRoot and %clean for compatibility.
Added BuildRoot field and %clean section again.

> - Get in touch with touch with upstream and tell him that the FSF address is
> outdated. Even better: Provide a patch.
I sent a message for him. Unfortunately, I do not know how to generate a patch
from svn..

Thanks again.

-- 
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.