Spec URL: http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/lrzip.spec SRPM URL: http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/lrzip-0.18-1.fc8.src.rpm Description: Long Range ZIP or Lzma RZIP This is a compression program optimised for large files. The larger the file and the more memory you have, the better the compression advantage this will provide, especially once the files are larger than 100MB. The advantage can be chosen to be either size (much smaller than bzip2) or speed (much faster than bzip2). Decompression is always much faster than bzip2.
Though mock build is successful and rpmlint reports no messages aginst SRPM and RPM but it does against debuginfo. Should we care those messages and try to solve them? I got rpmlint output on debuginfo package as lrzip-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/lrzip-0.18/lzma/C/7zip/Compress/RangeCoder/RangeCoder.h lrzip-debuginfo.i386: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/src/debug/lrzip-0.18/lzma/C/7zip/Compress/RangeCoder/RangeCoder.h ..... ..... many source files reported same messages like above for debuginfo package.
Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 285c995f6d861c4125f6164ab0ab2368 lrzip-0.18.tar.bz2 + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + Compiler flags are honoured correctly. + defattr usage is correct. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Package lrzip-0.18-1.fc8 -> Requires: libbz2.so.1 libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) libgcc_s.so.1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0) liblzo2.so.2 libm.so.6 libstdc++.so.6 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4) rtld(GNU_HASH) + Not a GUI App.
We really shouldn't care about the permissions in a debuginfo package.
APPROVED.
I am not understanding what goes wrong here. But I can see package in rawhide. I don't understand howcome package got entered without fedora-cvs+
I only forgot to set it.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: lrzip Updated Fedora Owners: warren, spstarr
Correct FAS name Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: lrzip Updated Fedora Owners: wtogami, spstarr
cvs done.