Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 225886
Merge Review: hfsutils
Last modified: 2009-10-06 23:14:54 EDT
Fedora Merge Review: hfsutils http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/hfsutils/ Initial Owner: dwmw2@redhat.com
Taking on review.
rpmlint output: hfsutils.src:202: W: macro-in-%changelog defattr hfsutils.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot Tools for reading and writing Macintosh HFS volumes. hfsutils.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot Tools for reading and writing Macintosh HFS volumes. hfsutils-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation hfsutils-devel.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot A C library for reading and writing Macintosh HFS volumes. hfsutils-x11.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot A Tk-based front end for browsing and copying files. 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. - Fix the above. - Drop empty %config line in %files. - Change buildroot to %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) - Drop INSTALL from %doc since it really isn't necessary. Also README can be dropped, since it is too about compilation. MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. OK MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. OK MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK SHOULD: Use INSTALL="install -p" as additional argument to make install to preserve time stamps. MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. OK MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. OK MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK MUST: Clean section exists. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK MUST: Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. OK MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. NEEDSFIX - Devel package needs to provide %{name}-static = %{version}-%{release} MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. OK MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files ending in .so must go in a -devel package. OK MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. ? - Any comment on this? In this case base package only contains binaries, so there's no need to require the base package. Consider including the %doc also in -devel, though. MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. OK MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
Ping.
ping dmwm2
ping again?
Pong! It seems that David is busy with other stuff, so i decided to step in and fix all these small issues (except dropping README - I cannot decide whether we should drop it or no, but, however, if you're insisting, then I will drop it too). Here is a koji scratchbuild http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1705983 rpmlint log: [petro@Sulaco SPECS]$ rpmlint ~/fuse/sshfs/work/Desktop/hfsutils-* hfsutils-devel.ppc: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [petro@Sulaco SPECS]$ I'm currently updating cvs branches, and will rebuild it very shortly.
hfsutils-3.2.6-18.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hfsutils-3.2.6-18.fc11
hfsutils-3.2.6-18.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hfsutils-3.2.6-18.fc10
Okay. Still to be fixed: SHOULD: Use INSTALL="install -p" as additional argument to make install to preserve time stamps (header files are not probably generated in %build). MUST: Devel package needs to provide %{name}-static = %{version}-%{release}.
Oops. Forgot about *-static. I'll add these changes shortly.
hfsutils-3.2.6-19.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hfsutils-3.2.6-19.fc11
hfsutils-3.2.6-19.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/hfsutils-3.2.6-19.fc10
OK, APPROVED.
hfsutils-3.2.6-19.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
hfsutils-3.2.6-19.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.