Bug 248358
Summary: | Review Request: kde-filesystem - KDE filesystem layout | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Rex Dieter <rdieter> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Kevin Kofler <kevin> |
Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, kevin, notting, than |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | kevin:
fedora-review+
wtogami: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | 3.5-6 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2007-09-10 19:06:10 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Rex Dieter
2007-07-16 12:43:13 UTC
This would presumably be Requires'd by kdelibs (and/or kde-settings ?) If this is for F8, 3.5 might not be that great a version number to use. ;-) I considered that, but does version really matter? It could be Version: 594854587 for all I care. :) Reviewing this one. MUST Items: ! rpmlint output: SRPM: > W: kde-filesystem no-url-tag OK, makes sense for a package like that. > W: kde-filesystem mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 7, tab: line 3) OK, not a real issue, you may want to be consistent, but it doesn't really matter. noarch RPM: > W: kde-filesystem no-documentation OK, no documentation needed for a package like that. > W: kde-filesystem hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/applnk/.hidden > W: kde-filesystem hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/applnk/.hidden OK, this one is really wanted. > E: kde-filesystem standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/icons ! This one is already owned by filesystem, please omit. > W: kde-filesystem no-url-tag OK, see above. + named and versioned according to the Package Naming Guidelines + spec file name matches base package name + Packaging Guidelines: + License Public Domain OK + No patent problems + No emulator, no firmware, no binary-only or prebuilt components + Complies with the FHS + proper changelog, tags, BuildRoot, Requires, BuildRequires, Summary, Description + no non-UTF-8 characters + no relevant documentation which would need to be included + nothing to compile, so RPM_OPT_FLAGS, debuginfo, static libraries, .la files, duplicated system libraries, rpaths, _smp_mflags don't apply + no configuration files, so %config guideline doesn't apply + no init scripts, so init script guideline doesn't apply + no executables, so no .desktop file present or needed + no timestamp-clobbering file commands + scriptlets are valid + not a web application, so web application guideline doesn't apply + no conflicts + complies with all the legal guidelines + no license which would need including (public domain) + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible + no source, so no need to check against upstream + builds on at least one arch (F7 i386 live system, FC6 i386 mock, Rawhide i386 mock) + no non-working arches, so no ExcludeArch needed + no build dependencies which would need listing as BuildRequires + locales handled properly (with %lang specifications) + no shared libraries, so need to call ldconfig + package not relocatable ! ownership correct (owns package-specific directories, doesn't own directories owned by another package) except for %{_datadir}/icons as found by rpmlint + no duplicate files in %files + permissions set properly + %clean section present and correct + macros used where possible + no non-code content + no large documentation files, so no -doc package needed + no %doc files, so no possible issues with %doc files required at runtime + no header files or .so symlinks which would need a -devel package + no static libraries, so no -static package needed + no .pc files, so no Requires: pkgconfig needed + no .la files + no GUI programs (in fact, no executables at all), so no .desktop file needed + buildroot is deleted at the beginning of %install But I strongly recommend a: mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT after the: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT to prevent a potential symlink attack as pointed out by the OpenSUSE folks. + all filenames are valid UTF-8 SHOULD Items: + no license which would need to be included + no translations for description and summary provided by upstream + builds in mock (tested FC6 i386 with Plague results and Rawhide i386, both on F7 build host) * skipping the "all architectures" test, I only have i386. There's nothing potentially arch-specific in the package anyway + package only creates directories, so no functionality test needed + scriptlets are sane + no subpackages, so "Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency." is irrelevant + no .pc files, so "placement of .pc files" is irrelevant + no file dependencies Please remove: %{_datadir}/icons/ from the file list as this is already owned by the filesystem package. With this change, this is APPROVED. I'd also suggest adding the mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, but this isn't a blocker. Thanks Kevin New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: kde-filesystem Short Description: KDE filesystem layout Owners: rdieter.edu,than Branches: F-7 InitialCC: Why is this still open? This has been in the repo for a while. Closing. |