Bug 556489

http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-esasl.spec
http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-esasl-0.1-2.fc12.src.rpm

%changelog
* Wed Feb  3 2010 Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov> 0.1-2
- Fix for EPEL

Koji scratchbuild for EPEL 5:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1961561

Koji scratchbuild for F-12:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1961567

Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable

+ MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review
Sources used when checking:

[Reset@localhost koji]$ md5sum libisds.spec
32ac2450de961b8f7dbd5014716f362c  libisds.spec
[Reset@localhost koji]$ md5sum libisds-0.1-1.el6.src.rpm 
4f5082969d4880f4622c4eff93d55c6a  libisds-0.1-1.el6.src.rpm

johanka:rpmbuild$ rpmlint -i RPMS/x86_64/erlang-esasl-*
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
johanka:rpmbuild$ rpmlint -i SRPMS/erlang-esasl-0.1-2.el6.src.rpm 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
johanka:rpmbuild$ 

+ MUST: package 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 licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual
license
LGPLv2+
This is wrong ... src/esasl.erl is not LGPLv2+
c_src/gsasl_drv.c is correct .. that's LGPLv2+

+ 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 must be included in %doc.
+ 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, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task
From srpm:
johanka:SOURCES$ md5sum esasl-0.1.tar.gz 
d1803057ee0c3f797c1605d99c7525b4  esasl-0.1.tar.gz
From upstream:
johanka:rpmbuild$ md5sum esasl-0.1.tar.gz 
d1803057ee0c3f797c1605d99c7525b4  esasl-0.1.tar.gz
= MATCHES
+ MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture
 - tested on x86_64, no problems
0 MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch
+ MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines
Build in koji (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1988076)
0 MUST: The spec file handles locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro
No locales
0 MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
Not appllicable
0 MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries
0 MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker
- MUST: Package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create
a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create
that directory
Package should probably own %{_libdir}/erlang/lib/%{realname}-%{version}/
Maybe plain
%{_libdir}/erlang/lib/%{realname}-%{version}/
could stand for the almost all %files section?
+ MUST: Package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings
+ MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Every %files section must
include a %defattr(...) line.
+ MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ MUST: Each package must consistently use macros
+ MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content
0 MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage
+ MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application
0 MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package
0 MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package
0 MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
0 MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package
0 MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
+ MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built
0 MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file 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: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
+ MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8

Please correct the indicated issues before approving.

Thanks! Fixed both issues:

http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-esasl.spec
http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-esasl-0.1-3.fc12.src.rpm

Yeah, fixed.

APPROVED

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: erlang-esasl
Short Description: Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) support for Erlang
Owners: peter
Branches: F-11 F-12 EL-5 EL-4
InitialCC:

CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).

erlang-esasl-0.1-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-esasl-0.1-3.fc11

erlang-esasl-0.1-3.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-esasl-0.1-3.fc12

erlang-esasl-0.1-3.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-esasl-0.1-3.el5

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-esasl-0.1-4.fc11

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-esasl-0.1-4.fc12

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-esasl-0.1-4.el5

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update erlang-esasl'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2010-0223

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update erlang-esasl'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F12/FEDORA-2010-1675

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update erlang-esasl'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2010-1250

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

erlang-esasl-0.1-4.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.