Bug 718999

I'll take this one.

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

Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!]  Rpmlint output:

$ rpmlint eclipse-packagekit-0.0.1-1.fc15.src.rpm
eclipse-packagekit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autotools -> auto tools, auto-tools, autopilots
eclipse-packagekit.src: E: description-line-too-long C PackageKit integration plugin. It also contains autotools and rpm plugins integration code.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.

I can't run it on the binary RPM because I can't build it (see below).

[x]  Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x]  Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format %{name}.spec.
[!]  Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].

Line 21 is > 80 characters.

[!]  Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.

I can't build it locally because I'm on 3.6 and it apparently requires 3.7:

Processing inclusion from feature org.eclipse.linuxtools.packagekit: Bundle org.eclipse.linuxtools.packagekit.autotools_0.0.1.201107050919 failed to resolve.:
	Missing required plug-in org.eclipse.core.runtime_3.7.0.

Please update the BRs and Rs to reflect the 3.7 requirement.

[x]  Buildroot definition is not present
[x]  Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines[3,4].
[x]  License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type:  EPL
[x]  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.
[-]  All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x]  Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]  Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.

d8620388acc46c9627c91ae55e257d94  eclipse-pkgkit.git;a=snapshot;h=998d35e1eb4e995c4732e0c20e3725760d8be8ad;sf=tgz
a6dbb70c08b033170f805b6d71994e91  /home/overholt/Downloads/eclipse-pkgkit-998d35e.tar.gz

These are different (and the filenames are different but that's gitweb playing tricks on us), but the exploded contents give no differences.

[!]  All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].

See above.

[x]  Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]  Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]  Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]  File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with good reason
[x]  Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]  Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x]  Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT mixing)
[x]  Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-]  Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-]  Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]  Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[-]  Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage
[-]  Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[-]  Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[-]  Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[-]  Package uses %global not %define
[-]  If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-]  If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be removed prior to building
[x]  All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[-]  Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[-]  If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant
[-]  pom files has correct add_to_maven_depmap call which resolves to the pom file (use "JPP." and "JPP-" correctly)

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines
[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 
[6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Filenames

Trying with this tarball:

http://fedorapeople.org/gitweb?p=akurtakov/public_git/eclipse-pkgkit.git;a=snapshot;h=4da4a97539ab2397abe0f745fa7eb8536d22d832;sf=tgz

(and gunzip eclipse-pkgkit-4da4a97.tar.gz; mv eclipse-pkgkit-4da4a97.tar{,.gz}), I can build with 3.6 just fine.  rpmlint isn't happy, though:

$ rpmlint eclipse-packagekit-0.0.1-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autotools -> auto tools, auto-tools, autopilots
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C PackageKit integration plugin. It also contains autotools and rpm plugins integration code.
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: E: no-binary
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/eclipse/dropins/packagekit/eclipse/plugins/unix.jar /usr/lib64/libmatthew-java/unix.jar
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/eclipse/dropins/packagekit/eclipse/plugins/hexdump.jar /usr/lib64/libmatthew-java/hexdump.jar
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /usr/share/eclipse/dropins/packagekit/eclipse/features/org.eclipse.linuxtools.packagekit_0.0.1.201107051018 0775L
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/eclipse/dropins/packagekit/eclipse/plugins/dbus.jar /usr/share/java/dbus-java/dbus.jar
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 4 warnings.

* Compilation on sdk 3.6 fixed.
* Line too long fixed.
* Rpmlint warnings:
- no binary - due ot bug in koji handling of libdir
- dangling symlinks - because we have no other way to handle symlinks properly
- I cannot see non-standard-dir-perm problem

New sources:
Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-packagekit.spec
SRPM URL:
http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-packagekit-0.0.2-1.fc15.src.rpm

[x] rpmlint output okay now:

$ rpmlint eclipse-packagekit-0.0.2-1.fc15.src.rpm 
eclipse-packagekit.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autotools -> auto tools, auto-tools, autopilots
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

$ rpmlint  eclipse-packagekit-0.0.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm 
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autotools -> auto tools, auto-tools, autopilots
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: E: no-binary
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/eclipse/dropins/packagekit/eclipse/plugins/unix.jar /usr/lib64/libmatthew-java/unix.jar
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/eclipse/dropins/packagekit/eclipse/plugins/hexdump.jar /usr/lib64/libmatthew-java/hexdump.jar
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/eclipse/dropins/packagekit/eclipse/plugins/dbus.jar /usr/share/java/dbus-java/dbus.jar
eclipse-packagekit.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /usr/share/eclipse/dropins/packagekit/eclipse/features/org.eclipse.linuxtools.packagekit_0.0.1.201107081559 0775L
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 4 warnings.

It builds just fine on 3.6 now and installs/runs perfectly.

I cannot get a functioning .tar.gz file from Fedora's gitweb but that's not your fault.  If I gunzip it and mv it to a .gz extension, I can tar xf it just fine.  The contents have no differences even though the md5sums don't match (as above).

This package is approved.  Thanks for the submission and I look forward to further use of this functionality in Fedora!

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: eclipse-packagekit
Short Description: PackageKit integration tools for Eclipse
Owners: akurtakov
Branches: 
InitialCC:

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: eclipse-packagekit
Short Description: PackageKit integration tools for Eclipse
Owners: akurtakov
Branches: f15
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=252312