Spec URL: http://www.codewiz.org/pub/fedora/specs/sugar-update-control.spec SRPM URL: http://www.codewiz.org/pub/fedora/source/sugar-update-control-0.20-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Control panel item for the Sugar graphical environment which locates and installs activity updates.
This is an unofficial review: Please check the following: --------------- - rpmlint -iv sugar-update-control.spec sugar-update-control.spec:42: E: files-attr-not-set A file or a directory entry in a %files section does not have attributes set which may result in security issues in the resulting binary package depending on the system where the package is built. Add default attributes using %defattr before it in the %files section, or use per line %attr's. sugar-update-control.spec:44: E: files-attr-not-set A file or a directory entry in a %files section does not have attributes set which may result in security issues in the resulting binary package depending on the system where the package is built. Add default attributes using %defattr before it in the %files section, or use per line %attr's. sugar-update-control.spec:45: E: files-attr-not-set A file or a directory entry in a %files section does not have attributes set which may result in security issues in the resulting binary package depending on the system where the package is built. Add default attributes using %defattr before it in the %files section, or use per line %attr's. 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 0 warnings. --------------- - rpmlint -iv ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/sugar-update-control-0.20-1.fc10.noarch.rpm sugar-update-control.noarch: I: checking sugar-update-control.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/bitfrost/util/urlrange.py 0644 This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. sugar-update-control.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/bitfrost/update/microformat.py 0644 This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. sugar-update-control.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/bitfrost/update/actutils.py 0644 This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. sugar-update-control.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/bitfrost/update/actinfo.py 0644 This text file contains a shebang or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks the executable bits and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the executable bits, otherwise remove the shebang or move the file elsewhere. sugar-update-control.noarch: E: incorrect-locale-subdir /usr/share/locale/pseudo/LC_MESSAGES/sugar-update-control.mo 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 0 warnings. --------------- Please see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#File_Permissions. Also, rerun "rpmlint -iv" on the "src.rpm" and "rpm" before submission. The above errors seems to be fixed by adding "%defattr(-,root,root,-)" in the file section. However, "rpmlint -iv" gives many other warnings. - It seems like the "/usr/share/sugar" directory is own by other package. Please see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership SUGGESTIONS: - Use %{_datadir} instead of "/usr/share" - Please provide instruction on how to get the latest upstream package (tar.gz) for checksum comparison. - Use "rm -rf" instead of "rm" OKAYS: - Lincensing (GPLv2+), license file included in the package. - Buildroot is correct
Also check out http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 481333 ***