Bug 232557 - Review Request: xml-commons-which - Which subproject of xml-commons
Review Request: xml-commons-which - Which subproject of xml-commons
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Permaine Cheung
Fedora Package Reviews List
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2007-03-15 22:58 EDT by Matt Wringe
Modified: 2008-03-06 07:50 EST (History)
0 users

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-03-06 07:50:43 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---
pcheung: fedora‑review+
wtogami: fedora‑cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Matt Wringe 2007-03-15 22:58:21 EDT
Spec URL: https://mwringe.108.redhat.com/files/documents/175/308/xml-commons-which.spec
SRPM URL: https://mwringe.108.redhat.com/files/documents/175/309/xml-commons-which-1.0-0.b2.0jpp.1.src.rpm
Description: The which subproject is an environment checking utility that scans 
your environment and reports common versions of xml-related files.

NOTE: this package contains the which component of the xml-commons package currently in core. The xml-commons package needs to be split due to its srpm containing sources for both xml-commons-apis and xml-commons-which.
Comment 2 Permaine Cheung 2007-03-16 11:54:58 EDT
Please fix items marked by X:
MUST:
* package is named appropriately
 - match upstream tarball or project name
 - try to match previous incarnations in other distributions/packagers for
consistency
 - specfile should be %{name}.spec
 - non-numeric characters should only be used in Release (ie. cvs or
   something)
 - for non-numerics (pre-release, CVS snapshots, etc.), see
   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PackageRelease
 - if case sensitivity is requested by upstream or you feel it should be
   not just lowercase, do so; otherwise, use all lower case for the name
* is it legal for Fedora to distribute this?
 - OSI-approved
 - not a kernel module
 - not shareware
 - is it covered by patents?
 - it *probably* shouldn't be an emulator
 - no binary firmware
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
 - use acronyms for licences where common
* specfile name matches %{name}
X verify source and patches (md5sum matches upstream, know what the patches do)
- md5sum doesn't match, i got the following when diff'ing the src tar ball and
from the svn export:
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/LICENSE.dom-software.txt
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/LICENSE.dom-software.txt
74c74
< (last updated $Date: 2002-02-01 00:13:42 +0100 (Fri, 01 Feb 2002) $)
\ No newline at end of file
---
> (last updated $Date: 2002-01-31 18:13:42 -0500 (Thu, 31 Jan 2002) $)
\ No newline at end of file
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/core.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/core.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/attribute.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/attribute.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/cdata-section.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/cdata-section.xml
3c3
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/comment.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/comment.xml
3c3
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/data.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/data.xml
3c3
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/document.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/document.xml
3c3
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/dom.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/dom.xml
3c3
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/element.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/element.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/exceptions.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/exceptions.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/named-node-map.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/named-node-map.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/node-list.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/node-list.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/node.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/node.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r
xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/notation.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/notation.xml
3c3
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/pi.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/pi.xml
3c3
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/text.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/text.xml
3c3
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/style/css.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/style/css.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/style/stylesheets.xml
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/style/stylesheets.xml
2c2
< <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
---
> <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913 $ -->
 - if upstream doesn't release source drops, put *clear* instructions on
   how to generate the the source drop; ie.
  # svn export blah/tag blah
  # tar cjf blah-version-src.tar.bz2 blah
* skim the summary and description for typos, etc.
* correct buildroot
 - should be:
   %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
* if %{?dist} is used, it should be in that form (note the ? and %
locations)
* license text included in package and marked with %doc
X keep old changelog entries; use judgement when removing (too old?
useless?)
should we get rid of the old changelog entries since this is now a new
 package and some of those may only apply to xml-commons-apis?
* packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
* rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives no output
W: xml-commons-which non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML - OK

* changelog should be in one of these formats:

  * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> - 0.6-4
  - And fix the link syntax.

  * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> 0.6-4
  - And fix the link syntax.

  * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com>
  - 0.6-4
  - And fix the link syntax.

* Packager tag should not be used
* Vendor tag should not be used
* Distribution tag should not be used
* use License and not Copyright
* Summary tag should not end in a period
* if possible, replace PreReq with Requires(pre) and/or Requires(post)
* specfile is legible
* package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86
* BuildRequires are proper
 - builds in mock will flush out problems here
 - the following packages don't need to be listed in BuildRequires:
   bash
   bzip2
   coreutils
   cpio
   diffutils
   fedora-release (and/or redhat-release)
   gcc
   gcc-c++
   gzip
   make
   patch
   perl
   redhat-rpm-config
   rpm-build
   sed
   tar
   unzip
   which
* summary should be a short and concise description of the package
* description expands upon summary (don't include installation
instructions)
* make sure lines are <= 80 characters
* specfile written in American English
* make a -doc sub-package if necessary
 - see
  
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-9bbfa57478f0460c6160947a6bf795249488182b
* packages including libraries should exclude static libraries if possible
* don't use rpath
* config files should usually be marked with %config(noreplace)
* GUI apps should contain .desktop files
* should the package contain a -devel sub-package?
* use macros appropriately and consistently
 - ie. %{buildroot} and %{optflags} vs. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
* don't use %makeinstall
* locale data handling correct (find_lang)
 - if translations included, add BR: gettext and use %find_lang %{name} at the
   end of %install
* consider using cp -p to preserve timestamps
* split Requires(pre,post) into two separate lines
* package should probably not be relocatable
* package contains code
 - see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#CodeVsContent
 - in general, there should be no offensive content
* package should own all directories and files
* there should be no %files duplicates
X file permissions should be okay; %defattrs should be present
 - do we need %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) twice in the first %files section?
* %clean should be present
* %doc files should not affect runtime
* if it is a web apps, it should be in /usr/share/%{name} and *not* /var/www
* verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
final provides and requires of the mock built binary RPMs:
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --provides
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
xml-commons-which-1.0.jar.so()(64bit)
xml-commons-which = 1:1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --provides
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
xml-commons-which-1.0.jar.so.debug()(64bit)
xml-commons-which-debuginfo = 1:1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --provides
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-javadoc-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
xml-commons-which-1.0.jar.so()(64bit)
xml-commons-which-javadoc = 1:1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --requires
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm/bin/sh
/bin/sh
ant
ant-launcher
java-gcj-compat
java-gcj-compat
jpackage-utils >= 0:1.5
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libdl.so.2()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libgcj_bc.so.1()(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
librt.so.1()(64bit)
libz.so.1()(64bit)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --requires
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --requires
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-javadoc-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libdl.so.2()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libgcj_bc.so.1()(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
librt.so.1()(64bit)
libz.so.1()(64bit)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)

X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs
rpmlint on mock built rpms:
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-*x86_64.rpm
pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
W: xml-commons-which non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML
W: xml-commons-which incoherent-version-in-changelog 1:1.0-0.b2.0jpp.1
1:1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-javadoc-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
W: xml-commons-which-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation

Please fix the incoherent-version-in-changelog warning (first .1 missing in release)

SHOULD:
* package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc
* package should build on i386
* package should build in mock
Comment 3 Matt Wringe 2007-03-16 15:53:48 EDT
(In reply to comment #2)
> Please fix items marked by X:
> MUST:
> * package is named appropriately
>  - match upstream tarball or project name
>  - try to match previous incarnations in other distributions/packagers for
> consistency
>  - specfile should be %{name}.spec
>  - non-numeric characters should only be used in Release (ie. cvs or
>    something)
>  - for non-numerics (pre-release, CVS snapshots, etc.), see
>    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PackageRelease
>  - if case sensitivity is requested by upstream or you feel it should be
>    not just lowercase, do so; otherwise, use all lower case for the name
> * is it legal for Fedora to distribute this?
>  - OSI-approved
>  - not a kernel module
>  - not shareware
>  - is it covered by patents?
>  - it *probably* shouldn't be an emulator
>  - no binary firmware
> * license field matches the actual license.
> * license is open source-compatible.
>  - use acronyms for licences where common
> * specfile name matches %{name}
> X verify source and patches (md5sum matches upstream, know what the patches do)
> - md5sum doesn't match, i got the following when diff'ing the src tar ball and
> from the svn export:
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/LICENSE.dom-software.txt
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/LICENSE.dom-software.txt
> 74c74
> < (last updated $Date: 2002-02-01 00:13:42 +0100 (Fri, 01 Feb 2002) $)
> \ No newline at end of file
> ---
> > (last updated $Date: 2002-01-31 18:13:42 -0500 (Thu, 31 Jan 2002) $)
> \ No newline at end of file
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/core.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/core.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/attribute.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/attribute.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/cdata-section.xml
>
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/cdata-section.xml
> 3c3
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/comment.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/comment.xml
> 3c3
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/data.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/data.xml
> 3c3
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/document.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/document.xml
> 3c3
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/dom.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/dom.xml
> 3c3
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/element.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/element.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/exceptions.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/exceptions.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/named-node-map.xml
>
../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/named-node-map.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/node-list.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/node-list.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/node.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/node.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r
> xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/notation.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/notation.xml
> 3c3
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/pi.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/pi.xml
> 3c3
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/text.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/core/definitions/text.xml
> 3c3
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/style/css.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/style/css.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> diff -r xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/style/stylesheets.xml
> ../xml-commons-1_0_b2/java/external/xdocs/dom/xml/style/stylesheets.xml
> 2c2
> < <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 13:15:37 +0200 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->
> ---
> > <!-- $Date: 2001-06-01 07:15:37 -0400 (Fri, 01 Jun 2001) $ $Revision: 225913
$ -->

Yeah, I don't know what is causing the 6 hour time stamp difference between the
two, this shouldn't be an issue since all the code is the same. I have updated
the sources so this should not be an issue anymore.

>  - if upstream doesn't release source drops, put *clear* instructions on
>    how to generate the the source drop; ie.
>   # svn export blah/tag blah
>   # tar cjf blah-version-src.tar.bz2 blah
> * skim the summary and description for typos, etc.
> * correct buildroot
>  - should be:
>    %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
> * if %{?dist} is used, it should be in that form (note the ? and %
> locations)
> * license text included in package and marked with %doc
> X keep old changelog entries; use judgement when removing (too old?
> useless?)
> should we get rid of the old changelog entries since this is now a new
>  package and some of those may only apply to xml-commons-apis?
Ok, I removed them. Since I based this off the xml-commons package which is
split up I kept the old changelogs, but I guess this doesn't make much sense.

> * packages meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/)
> * rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives no output
> W: xml-commons-which non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML - OK
> 
> * changelog should be in one of these formats:
> 
>   * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> - 0.6-4
>   - And fix the link syntax.
> 
>   * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> 0.6-4
>   - And fix the link syntax.
> 
>   * Fri Jun 23 2006 Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com>
>   - 0.6-4
>   - And fix the link syntax.
> 
> * Packager tag should not be used
> * Vendor tag should not be used
> * Distribution tag should not be used
> * use License and not Copyright
> * Summary tag should not end in a period
> * if possible, replace PreReq with Requires(pre) and/or Requires(post)
> * specfile is legible
> * package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86
> * BuildRequires are proper
>  - builds in mock will flush out problems here
>  - the following packages don't need to be listed in BuildRequires:
>    bash
>    bzip2
>    coreutils
>    cpio
>    diffutils
>    fedora-release (and/or redhat-release)
>    gcc
>    gcc-c++
>    gzip
>    make
>    patch
>    perl
>    redhat-rpm-config
>    rpm-build
>    sed
>    tar
>    unzip
>    which
> * summary should be a short and concise description of the package
> * description expands upon summary (don't include installation
> instructions)
> * make sure lines are <= 80 characters
> * specfile written in American English
> * make a -doc sub-package if necessary
>  - see
>   
>
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-9bbfa57478f0460c6160947a6bf795249488182b
> * packages including libraries should exclude static libraries if possible
> * don't use rpath
> * config files should usually be marked with %config(noreplace)
> * GUI apps should contain .desktop files
> * should the package contain a -devel sub-package?
> * use macros appropriately and consistently
>  - ie. %{buildroot} and %{optflags} vs. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
> * don't use %makeinstall
> * locale data handling correct (find_lang)
>  - if translations included, add BR: gettext and use %find_lang %{name} at the
>    end of %install
> * consider using cp -p to preserve timestamps
> * split Requires(pre,post) into two separate lines
> * package should probably not be relocatable
> * package contains code
>  - see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#CodeVsContent
>  - in general, there should be no offensive content
> * package should own all directories and files
> * there should be no %files duplicates
> X file permissions should be okay; %defattrs should be present
>  - do we need %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) twice in the first %files section?
The second one is removed.

> * %clean should be present
> * %doc files should not affect runtime
> * if it is a web apps, it should be in /usr/share/%{name} and *not* /var/www
> * verify the final provides and requires of the binary RPMs
> final provides and requires of the mock built binary RPMs:
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --provides
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
> xml-commons-which-1.0.jar.so()(64bit)
> xml-commons-which = 1:1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --provides
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
> xml-commons-which-1.0.jar.so.debug()(64bit)
> xml-commons-which-debuginfo = 1:1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --provides
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-javadoc-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
> xml-commons-which-1.0.jar.so()(64bit)
> xml-commons-which-javadoc = 1:1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --requires
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm/bin/sh
> /bin/sh
> ant
> ant-launcher
> java-gcj-compat
> java-gcj-compat
> jpackage-utils >= 0:1.5
> libc.so.6()(64bit)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
> libdl.so.2()(64bit)
> libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
> libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
> libgcj_bc.so.1()(64bit)
> libm.so.6()(64bit)
> libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
> librt.so.1()(64bit)
> libz.so.1()(64bit)
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> rtld(GNU_HASH)
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --requires
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpm -qp --requires
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-javadoc-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
> libc.so.6()(64bit)
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
> libdl.so.2()(64bit)
> libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
> libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
> libgcj_bc.so.1()(64bit)
> libm.so.6()(64bit)
> libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
> librt.so.1()(64bit)
> libz.so.1()(64bit)
> rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
> rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> rtld(GNU_HASH)
> 
> X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs
> rpmlint on mock built rpms:
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-*x86_64.rpm
> pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
> W: xml-commons-which non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML
> W: xml-commons-which incoherent-version-in-changelog 1:1.0-0.b2.0jpp.1
> 1:1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-debuginfo-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
> [pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
>
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-javadoc-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.fc7.x86_64.rpm
> W: xml-commons-which-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation
> 
> Please fix the incoherent-version-in-changelog warning (first .1 missing in
release)
Done

> SHOULD:
> * package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc
> * package should build on i386
> * package should build in mock
> 

New Files: 
https://mwringe.108.redhat.com/files/documents/175/316/xml-commons-which-1.0-0.1.b2.0jpp.1.src.rpm
https://mwringe.108.redhat.com/files/documents/175/317/xml-commons-which.spec
Comment 4 Permaine Cheung 2007-03-16 16:50:45 EDT
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
...
> Yeah, I don't know what is causing the 6 hour time stamp difference between the
> two, this shouldn't be an issue since all the code is the same. I have updated
> the sources so this should not be an issue anymore.
Great!
> > X keep old changelog entries; use judgement when removing (too old?
> > useless?)
> > should we get rid of the old changelog entries since this is now a new
> >  package and some of those may only apply to xml-commons-apis?
> Ok, I removed them. Since I based this off the xml-commons package which is
> split up I kept the old changelogs, but I guess this doesn't make much sense.
Thanks.
> > X file permissions should be okay; %defattrs should be present
> >  - do we need %defattr(0644,root,root,0755) twice in the first %files section?
> The second one is removed.
OK
> > X run rpmlint on the binary RPMs
> > rpmlint on mock built rpms:
> > 
> > Please fix the incoherent-version-in-changelog warning (first .1 missing in
> release)
> Done

Great!

rpmlint on mock built binary rpms:
[pcheung@to-fcjpp1 bsf-2.3.0]$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/xml-commons-which-*
W: xml-commons-which non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML
W: xml-commons-which non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML
W: xml-commons-which-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation


APPROVED
Comment 5 Matt Wringe 2007-03-16 17:01:49 EDT
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: xml-commons-which
Short Description: Which subproject of xml-commons
Owners: mwringe@redhat.com
Branches: devel

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.