Fedora Merge Review: python-docs http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/python-docs/ Initial Owner: wtogami
- What is the stuff at the beginning needed for? - You can use %{!?pyver: %global pyver %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print sys.version[:3]")} to get the Python base version. - Patches are not documented. - Commented patches should be removed. - BuildRoot should be %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) - Remove topdir, pushd and popd and use make -C Doc instead. - Remove buildroot check from install.
rpmlint output: python-docs.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot Documentation for the Python programming language. python-docs.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot Documentation for the Python programming language. python-docs.src:28: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes python2-docs 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. NEEDSFIX - See stuff mentioned above. 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: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. 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. NEEDSFIX - Why %defattr(-,root,root,755)? MUST: Clean section exists. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. 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
Please address the issues above.
diff -u -p -r1.18 python-docs.spec --- python-docs.spec 26 Feb 2009 21:14:56 -0000 1.18 +++ python-docs.spec 27 Apr 2009 14:52:41 -0000 @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ %define pybasever 2.6 -Summary: Documentation for the Python programming language. +Summary: Documentation for the Python programming language Name: %{python}-docs Version: %{pybasever} Release: 2%{?dist} @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %files -%defattr(-,root,root,755) +%defattr(-,root,root) %doc Misc/NEWS Misc/README Misc/cheatsheet %doc Misc/HISTORY Doc/build/html Is it ok? > python-docs.src:28: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes python2-docs Any idea which version?
(In reply to comment #4) > %files > -%defattr(-,root,root,755) > +%defattr(-,root,root) > %doc Misc/NEWS Misc/README Misc/cheatsheet > %doc Misc/HISTORY Doc/build/html > > Is it ok? Should be %defattr(-,root,root,-) > > python-docs.src:28: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes python2-docs > Any idea which version? This isn't a problem. Please address the issues in comment #1.
diff -u -p -r1.18 python-docs.spec --- python-docs.spec 26 Feb 2009 21:14:56 -0000 1.18 +++ python-docs.spec 6 May 2009 09:47:22 -0000 @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ %define pybasever 2.6 -Summary: Documentation for the Python programming language. +Summary: Documentation for the Python programming language Name: %{python}-docs Version: %{pybasever} Release: 2%{?dist} @@ -20,7 +20,6 @@ Source: http://www.python.org/ftp/python BuildArch: noarch Patch4: python-2.6-nowhatsnew.patch -#Patch17: python-2.4-tex-fix.patch Patch18: python-2.6-extdocmodules.patch Requires: %{python} = %{version} @@ -29,7 +28,8 @@ Obsoletes: python2-docs Provides: python2-docs = %{version} %endif -BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-root +BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX) + BuildRequires: %{python} python-sphinx python-docutils python-jinja BuildRequires: python-pygments URL: http://www.python.org/ @@ -46,19 +46,16 @@ for the Python language. %setup -q -n Python-%{version} %patch4 -p1 -b .nowhatsnew -#%%patch17 -p1 -b .tex-fix %patch18 -p1 -b .extdocmodules %build topdir=`pwd` -pushd Doc -make html +make -C Doc html #rm html/index.html.in Makefile* info/Makefile tools/sgmlconv/Makefile -popd %install -[ -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ] && rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT +rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT @@ -66,7 +63,7 @@ mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT rm -fr $RPM_BUILD_ROOT %files -%defattr(-,root,root,755) +%defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc Misc/NEWS Misc/README Misc/cheatsheet %doc Misc/HISTORY Doc/build/html >- What is the stuff at the beginning needed for? I don't know. The same is in python spec file >- You can use >%{!?pyver: %global pyver %(%{__python} -c "import sys ; print >sys.version[:3]")} >to get the Python base version. I don't change it. I think the better is to set version by hand. >- Patches are not documented. Patches are from previous package - python. I don't know what they were solving... >- Commented patches should be removed. Commented lines removed. Patches aren't in cvs. All else should be fixed.
OK, please commit the new spec to CVS so I can approve.
done
- You might want to add "-p" to "mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" in install phase. - Also, you can remove the unnecessary topdir=`pwd` from the build phase. The package has been APPROVED