[Bug 797447] Review Request: easybashgui - Bash function library

[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=797447

Remi Collet <fedora at famillecollet.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |fedora at famillecollet.com
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |fedora at famillecollet.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #1 from Remi Collet <fedora at famillecollet.com> 2012-03-04 03:21:05 EST ---

Package Review
==============

Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated



==== Generic ====
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines. GPLv3+
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
     least one supported primary architecture.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
     that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
     Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
     Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
     Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[-]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
     Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
     license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
     license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[ ]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint easybashgui-4.0.2-1.fc18.src.rpm
easybashgui.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wich -> winch, witch,
which

rpmlint easybashgui-4.0.2-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
easybashgui.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wich -> winch,
witch, which
easybashgui.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary easydialog
easybashgui.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary easybashgui-test
easybashgui.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary easybashgui

[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL. (md5sum 0c084e5f2776182d2003f14410a00a88)
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
     %{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
     separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
     include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
     /usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
     --requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
     upstream.
[x]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
     Note: Source0: EasyBashGUI_%{version}.tar.gz
     (EasyBashGUI_%{version}.tar.gz) => only case.
[!]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. => ok as explain
[!]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[-]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[!]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. => cannot be run in mock
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.

Issues:
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.

rpmlint easybashgui-4.0.2-1.fc18.src.rpm
easybashgui.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wich -> winch, witch,
which

Generated by fedora-review 0.1.2



MUST:
- fix trivial typo in %description
- easybashgui-test is not needed in /usr/bin
  provided this file in %doc seems a good idea

-- 
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.