Bug 692069

The -devel subpackage contains only one file, the timepps.h header and there are no dependencies, maybe it could go to the main package?

The header file is a build requirement for ntp, chrony and gpsd packages, which currently include their own copy of the file.

Review:

+ OK
- NA
? ISSUE

+ Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
+ Spec file matches base package name.
+ Spec has consistant macro usage.
+ Meets Packaging Guidelines.
+ License
+ License field in spec matches
? License file included in package
^^
Please include debian/copyright in the package's %doc section.
Is the README worth including in %docs. 

+ Spec in American English
+ Spec is legible.
+ Sources match upstream md5sum:
^^^
git archives, checked with diff:
[ankur@ankur pps-tools]$ pwd
/home/ankur/dump/pps-tools
[ankur@ankur pps-tools]$ diff -ur ../../rpmbuild/SOURCES/pps-tools/  ./
Only in ./: .git


- Package needs ExcludeArch
+ BuildRequires correct
- Spec handles locales/find_lang
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
+ Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
+ Package has a correct %clean section.
+ Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
^^ 
If you're not building for rhel etc., you can get rid of the above 3 portions. 

+ Package is code or permissible content.
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
+ Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

+ Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
^^
Even though there's only one header, I think we should leave it in the -devel package. 

- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
- .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
- .so files in -devel subpackage.
? -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
^^ 
The devel is only a header. No sonames or anything here. Don't think this is required. Need to confirm.

- .la files are removed.

- Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file

+ Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
+ Package has no duplicate files in %files.
+ Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
+ Package owns all the directories it creates.
+ No rpmlint output.
+ final provides and requires are sane:
== pps-tools-0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
pps-tools = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
pps-tools(x86-32) = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17

Requires:
/bin/sh  
libc.so.6  
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)  
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)  
rtld(GNU_HASH)  

== pps-tools-0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17.src.rpm ==
Provides:

Requires:

== pps-tools-debuginfo-0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
pps-tools-debuginfo = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
pps-tools-debuginfo(x86-32) = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17

Requires:

== pps-tools-devel-0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
pps-tools-devel = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
pps-tools-devel(x86-32) = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17

Requires:


SHOULD Items:

+ Should build in mock.
+ Should build on all supported archs
^^ builds on both i386 and x86_64 

- Should function as described.
- Should have sane scriptlets.
+ Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
Not required for this package.

+ Should have dist tag
+ Should package latest version
- check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)

Issues:

1. Only the license/docs need to be included.

Thanks for the review. I've updated the spec to include the README and copyright files and also included a symlink in /usr/include/sys for better compatibility. The devel package shouldn't need anything from the base package.

http://mlichvar.fedorapeople.org/tmp/pps-tools-0-0.2.20100413git74c32c.fc14.src.rpm

Hello,

I was just wondering if it would be better to link it like this:

ln -s $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_includedir}/timepps.h $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_includedir}/sys

instead of 

ln -s ../timepps.h $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_includedir}/sys

The rest looks good!

[ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/*.rpm
pps-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ppsbind
pps-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ppswatch
pps-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ppsfind
pps-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ppstest
pps-tools.src: W: invalid-url Source0: pps-tools-20100413git74c32c.tar.gz
pps-tools-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/pps-tools/timepps.h
pps-tools-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
pps-tools-devel.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/timepps.h
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 6 warnings.


Please do request upstream to correct the FSF address. 

XX APPROVED XX

I think relative symlinks are preferred for this.

Thanks for the review!

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: pps-tools
Short Description: LinuxPPS user-space tools
Owners: mlichvar
Branches: f15 f16
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

Package available in repositories. Closing.