Fedora Merge Review: gstreamer-plugins-base http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/gstreamer-plugins-base/ Initial Owner: ajackson
MUST Items: xx - rpmlint is unclean on RPM and SRPM + See: http://rishi.fedorapeople.org/gstreamer-plugins-base.rpmlint OK - follows Naming Guidelines + Although the upstream tarball is named gst-plugins-base, the project is named gstreamer, which is the prefix used by Debian also. OK - spec file is named as %{name}.spec xx - package does not meet Packaging Guidelines + Please try not to mix spaces and tabs as field separators. + You could consider passing --disable-gnome_vfs to %configure, because a simple non-Mock or non-Koji rpmbuild will fail if gnome-vfs is present due to PolicyKit-gnome, abiword, brasero, evolution, yelp, etc.. + According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath we should avoid rpaths, especially for standard locations like %{_libdir}. Here is a possible solution: BuildRequires: libtool [...] %build %configure \ [...] rm -f ./libtool cp %{_bindir}/libtool . [...] + Here is how the unused-direct-shlib-dependency can be removed: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Common_Rpmlint_Issues#unused-direct-shlib-dependency + According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used %makeinstall macro should not be used. To also preserve timestamps you could consider using: make install INSTALL="%{__install} -p" DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT + Why not include ChangeLog, NEWS and RELEASE in %doc? + According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Documentation the REQUIREMENTS file should not be distributed. + The most recent entry in the %changelog has a typo. The %{version}-%{release} should be 0.10.21-3. + In the %changelog %files should be replaced by %%files in this entry: * Wed Jan 18 2006 John (J5) Palmieri <johnp> - 0.10.2-1 + The following lines in gst-libs/gst/fft, are responsible for libgstfft-0.10.so.0.15.0 calling exit: kiss_fftr_f32.c:81: exit (1); kiss_fftr_f32.c:138: exit (1); kiss_fftr_f64.c:81: exit (1); kiss_fftr_f64.c:138: exit (1); kiss_fftr_s16.c:81: exit (1); kiss_fftr_s16.c:138: exit (1); kiss_fftr_s32.c:81: exit (1); kiss_fftr_s32.c:138: exit (1); I do not know what we can do about this, but nowadays rpmlint marks this as a warning. OK - license meets Licensing Guidelines OK - License field meets actual license xx - upstream license file included in %doc + COPYING contains the GPLv2, while the actual license of this package is LGPLv2+. Please include COPYING.LIB instead. OK - spec file uses American English OK - spec file is legible OK - sources match upstream sources xx - package does not build successfully + Libtheora has a broken version numbering in its *.pc file. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/478651 Since the version of libtheora in Fedora 8 and above is recent enough, we can disable the version check in the configure script. OK - ExcludeArch not needed OK - build dependencies correctly listed + Pedantically speaking 'BuildRequires: libtheora >= 1.0' is wrong, but libtheora has a broken NEVRA (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/478651) so we have to live with it. OK - locales handled properly xx - %post and %postun do not invoke ldconfig + Since shared libraries are being installed in the dynamic linker's default path, ldconfig should be invoked in the %post and %postun scriptlets. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Shared_libraries OK - package is not relocatable xx - file and directory ownership + The -devel sub-package should have 'Requires: gtk-doc' as it installs files under /usr/share/gtk-doc. + The -devel sub-package should have 'Requires: pkgconfig' as it installs files under /usr/lib/pkgconfig. Or has the new autogenerated pkgconfig dependencies feature removed this requirement? OK - no duplicates in %file OK - file permissions set properly + The preferred attribute definition is: %defattr(-,root,root,-) OK - %clean present OK - macros used consistently OK - contains code and permissable content OK - -doc is not needed OK - contents of %doc does not affect the runtime OK - header files in -devel OK - no static libraries xx - -devel has *.pc file and does not require pkgconfig + The -devel sub-package should have 'Requires: pkgconfig' as it installs a *.pc file under /usr/lib/pkgconfig. Or has the new autogenerated pkgconfig dependencies feature removed this requirement? OK - library files without suffix in -devel + Some plugins, which are shared libraries without a suffix, are in the main package. This is fine. xx - -devel does not require base package using fully versioned dependency + The -devel subpackage should have 'Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}' instead of just 'Requires: %{name} = %{version}'. Is there any reason for this to be otherwise? OK - no libtool archives OK - %{name}.desktop file not needed OK - does not own files or directories owned by other packages OK - buildroot correctly prepped OK - all file names valid UTF-8 SHOULD Items: OK - upstream provides license text xx - no translations for description and summary xx - package does not build in mock successfully + Libtheora has a broken version numbering in its *.pc file. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/478651 Since the version of libtheora in Fedora 8 and above is recent enough, we can disable the version check in the configure script. OK - package builds on all supported architectures OK - package functions as expected xx - scriptlets are not sane + Since shared libraries are being installed in the dynamic linker's default path, ldconfig should be invoked in the %post and %postun scriptlets. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Shared_libraries OK - subpackages other than -devel are not needed OK - pkgconfig files in -devel OK - no file dependencies
Created attachment 328137 [details] Sample Spec file fixes.
Created attachment 328138 [details] Sample Patch1 to avoid libtheora version checking.
Ping?
Mass reassigning all merge reviews to their component. For more details, see this FESCO ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1269 If you don't know what merge reviews are about, please see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Merge_Reviews How to handle this bug is left to the discretion of the package maintainer.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 23 development cycle. Changing version to '23'. (As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 23 development cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 23 End Of Life. Thank you.) More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora23
Obsolete now, fixes are included already