Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libindi.spec SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libindi-0.6-1.src.rpm Description: INDI is a distributed control protocol designed to operate astronomical instrumentation. INDI is small, flexible, easy to parse, and scalable. It supports common DCS functions such as remote control, data acquisition, monitoring, and a lot more.
Created attachment 330864 [details] LIB_SUFFIX patch Same style patch as for libfli.
Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated === REQUIRED ITEMS === [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Tested on: f10 / x86_64 [!] Rpmlint output: not clean - libindi.src: W: strange-permission libindi0_0.6.tar.gz 0400 - libindi.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libindi.so.0.6 exit.5 [-] Package is not relocatable. [x] Buildroot is correct [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License type: LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+ [x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. - Tarball includes licenses in its own file only for LGPL, not GPL. As GPL is stated in right sources I don't think this is blocker but should be better to ask upstream. [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [-] The spec file handles locales properly. [x] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x] Package must own all directories that it creates. [-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x] Permissions on files are set properly. [x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [!] Package consistently uses macros. - Please do not use %{__ macros and use only <command>, I talked to RPM developer and FESCo member and they do not like it. But this is not a blocker, feel free to select one consistent style. [x] Package contains code, or permissable content. [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present. [x] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la). [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. === SUGGESTED ITEMS === [x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?] Reviewer should test that the package builds in koji. - libfli not in koji [?] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. - libfli not in koji [?] Package functions as described. [-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [-] File based requires are sane. === SUMMARY === - Clean rpmlint output - Ask upstream about licenses - Check macros - Check in Koji once libfli is in
As Kevin Kofler mentioned in libfli review - please add %{?dist} tag to release. Koji build (dist-f11) - OK
Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libindi.spec SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libindi-0.6-2.src.rpm I have filled a pair of bugs about library calling exit and the missing GPLv2 license. I'm using commands instead of macros now.
(In reply to comment #4) > Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libindi.spec > SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libindi-0.6-2.src.rpm > > I have filled a pair of bugs about library calling exit and the missing GPLv2 > license. I'm using commands instead of macros now. Source RPM does not exist - 404.
Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libindi.spec SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/libindi-0.6-2.fc10.src.rpm Upss! the dist tag was missing
Ok, thanks. It's OK for me now - as it's blocker for kde42, we can deal with these issues later once upstream fixes it. APPROVED
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: libindi Short Description: Instrument Neutral Distributed Interface Owners: sergiopr Branches: F-10 F-9 InitialCC:
cvs done.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: libindi New Branches: epel7 Owners: lupinix InitialCC: lupinix Want to have this package in EPEL7 :)
Git done (by process-git-requests).