Spec URL: http://kdeforge.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SOURCES/kdepimlibs/devel/kdepimlibs.spec SRPM URL: http://kdeforge.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SOURCES/kdepimlibs/devel/kdepimlibs-3.91.0-3.src.rpm Description: Personal Information Management (PIM) libraries for the K Desktop Environment 4.
The spec URL doesn't work, it's actually at: http://kdeforge.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SOURCES/kdepimlibs/devel/kdepimlibs4.spec
The build (in mock for Rawhide) fails because of this: Error: Missing Dependency: kdelibs = 3.91.0-5.fc8 is needed by package kdelibs-devel Missing epoch there. So I can't really review this without a fixed kdelibs 4 SRPM.
ok.
kdelibs 4 fixed now, so here's the review: MUST Items: ! rpmlint output: * W: kdepimlibs no-documentation -> At least the license should be included as %doc. (I'll take the blame for that one. ;-) ) * W: kdepimlibs-devel no-documentation -> OK, this one is acceptable, but like for Soprano, we should generate apidocs for kdelibs and kdepimlibs before the F8 release. * W: kdepimlibs-debuginfo spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/kdepimlibs-3.91.0/mailtransport/servertest.h -> OK, this one is upstream's fault. + named and versioned according to the Package Naming Guidelines ! spec file name doesn't match base package name, please rename to kdepimlibs.spec before import + Packaging Guidelines: + License LGPL OK, matches actual license + No known patent problems + No emulator, no firmware, no binary-only or prebuilt components + Complies with the FHS + proper changelog, tags, BuildRoot, Requires, BuildRequires, Summary, Description + no non-UTF-8 characters ! relevant documentation not included See "rpmlint output" above. + RPM_OPT_FLAGS are used (%cmake macro) + debuginfo package is valid + no static libraries nor .la files + no duplicated system libraries + no rpaths, at least on i386 (I ran readelf -d on the shared objects) + no configuration files, so %config guideline doesn't apply + no init scripts, so init script guideline doesn't apply + no executables, so no .desktop file present or needed + no timestamp-clobbering file commands + _smp_mflags used + scriptlets are valid + not a web application, so web application guideline doesn't apply + no conflicts + complies with all the legal guidelines ! license not included as %doc (see "rpmlint output" above) + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible + source matches upstream: MD5SUM: 978712ededae818f2b9225897684b752 SHA1SUM: 9bb8202db3a7a5ee968cfb26c24800e3d08103de + builds on at least one arch (F8 i386 mock) + no known non-working arches, so no ExcludeArch needed + all build dependencies listed in CMakeLists.txt as well as cmake itself are listed in BuildRequires (However, an additional BuildRequires: doxygen will be needed for the -apidocs.) + no translations in original tarball, so translation/locale guidelines don't apply + ldconfig correctly called in %post and %postun + package not relocatable + ownership correct (owns package-specific directories, doesn't own directories owned by another package) + no duplicate files in %files + permissions set properly + %clean section present and correct + macros used where possible + no non-code content + no large documentation files, so no -doc package needed + no %doc files, so no possible issues with %doc files required at runtime + all header files in -devel + no static libraries, so no -static package needed + no .pc files, so no Requires: pkgconfig needed + /usr/lib/*.so symlinks are correctly in -devel + /usr/lib/kde4/*.so plugins (NOT symlinks) are correctly NOT in -devel + -devel requires %{name} = %{version}-%{release} + no .la files + no GUI programs (in fact, no executables at all), so no .desktop file needed + buildroot is deleted at the beginning of %install But you know my usual nitpick by now. ;-) I recommend a: mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT after the: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT to prevent a potential symlink attack as pointed out by the OpenSUSE folks. Though in this case my original packages didn't have it either, so I take part of the blame. Anyway, it's not required by the guidelines, so this is definitely not a blocker. + all filenames are valid UTF-8 SHOULD Items: + license already included upstream + no translations for description and summary provided by upstream + package builds in mock (Rawhide i386) * Skipping the "all architectures" test. + package functions as expected (at least the F7 version I tested did ;-) ) + scriptlets are sane + no subpackages other than -devel, so "Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency." is irrelevant + no .pc files, so "placement of .pc files" is irrelevant + no file dependencies Please fix these before import: * add at least the license(s) as %doc * rename the specfile to kdepimlibs.spec With these changes, the package is APPROVED. These can be addressed at a later time: * add BuildRequires: doxygen * create an -apidocs subpackage
Created attachment 159855 [details] cleanup specfile * Tue Jul 24 2007 Than Ngo <than> - 3.91.0-4 - add BuildRequires: doxygen - add README COPYING COPYING.BSD COPYING.LIB - rename to kdepimlibs Kevin, could you please approve this, so we can commit into kde4-branch CVS? Thanks
I already did (fedora-review is already +, I've also just checked your changes and can confirm that they adress the 2 points I raised), all that's missing is the CVS request. I can fill it out if you want, but normally it's the submitter doing it. :-) Your BuildRequires: doxygen won't do anything by itself. It also needs the "make apidox" or something like that and the -apidocs subpackage. But as I already said, this can be addressed later.
Created attachment 159857 [details] cleanup specfile correct specfile
Kevin, it's nice if you could fill it out please. So i can commit it into CVS ASAP. Thanks
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: kdepimlibs Short Description: K Desktop Environment - PIM Libraries Owners: than,rdieter.edu Branches: InitialCC:
Given that the plan for F8 has changed, we cannot simply update kdelibs to the KDE 4 version, so this cannot be built before kdelibs4 is approved and imported. (That's also why it's still open.) Adding a dependency accordingly.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: kdepimlibs New Branches: F-7 We'd like an F7 branch for this one please, with the same permissions as devel.
cvs done.
Built for Rawhide and F7, push to F7 updates-testing requested.