Spec URL: http://www.rindt.name/fileadmin/rpmbuild/SPECS/mtkbabel.spec SRPM URL: http://www.rindt.name/fileadmin/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtkbabel-0.8-0.1.fc10.src.rpm Description: MTKBabel is a Perl program to operate the i-Blue 747 GPS data logger. It should work also with other GPS devices based on the MediaTek MTK chipset. It is free software released under the GPL license.
What's your ID in the Fedora account system? A search didn't turn anything up.
Notes: * Url should point to its new home, at SF. * Ver. 0.8 is out. Please, update. * Field "Release" must not contain .fc10 postfix. Use %{?dist} macro instead. * No such group "Hardware/Mobile". Take a look at the "/usr/share/doc/rpm-*/GROUPS" for the ull list of allowed values. * Use full path to the source. * Field "License" should contain GPLv2+ Other things looks sane. Please update your srpm, and I'll continue.
(In reply to comment #1) > What's your ID in the Fedora account system? A search didn't turn anything up. drindt <drindt>, I suppose.
For some reason a search still doesn't find that for me. However, directly quering shows that drindt needs a sponsor. Setting that now. Daniel, please read through http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers if you haven't.
(In reply to comment #2) > Notes: > > * Url should point to its new home, at SF. > * Ver. 0.8 is out. Please, update. > * Field "Release" must not contain .fc10 postfix. Use %{?dist} macro instead. > * No such group "Hardware/Mobile". Take a look at the > "/usr/share/doc/rpm-*/GROUPS" for the ull list of allowed values. > * Use full path to the source. > * Field "License" should contain GPLv2+ > > Other things looks sane. Please update your srpm, and I'll continue. Please recheck it at: http://www.rindt.name/fileadmin/rpmbuild/SRPMS/mtkbabel-0.8-1.fc10.src.rpm http://www.rindt.name/fileadmin/rpmbuild/SPECS/mtkbabel.spec changes executed as you mentioned. the 0.8 is the latest release peter. My ID is "drindt" yes.
I just found some more issues - seems, that these are the last remaining issues: * You don't need to explicitly add "Requires: perl-Some-Extension" since rpmbuild can find them automatically (it scans sources for "use Some::Thing" directives and for shebangs, and adds them as "Requires: perl(Some::Thing). So, I advise you to remove all explicit Requires directives. * No need to add perl as BuildRequires. * Please, don't mark man-files ad %doc, e.g. remove %doc directive before %{_mandir}/man1/*.* in the %files section. * Blocker issue. You must add "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" to the head of your install section. * I advice you to shorten %install section by exploiting the magic power of "install" utility - it can create necessary directories by user's demand, while installing. E.g. instead of install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir} install mtkbabel $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/ install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_mandir}/man1 install -m0644 mtkbabel.1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_mandir}/man1/ you may simply write (note -D switch added): install -D -m 0755 mtkbabel $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/mtkbabel install -D -m 0644 mtkbabel.1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_mandir}/man1/mtkbabel.1 I'm sorry, for not to pointing you to all these issues before - seems that I looked to your first srpm very inattentively.
(In reply to comment #6) > I'm sorry, for not to pointing you to all these issues before - seems that I > looked to your first srpm very inattentively. It's no problem. The files are updated for your review.
I "sponsored" you. Don't hesitate to contact me directly via xmpp or email ( lemenkov ) for any question regarding rules of slightly complex role-playing game, named "Fedora package maintainership" REVIEW: + rpmlint is silent [petro@Workplace Desktop]$ rpmlint mtkbabel-0.8-1.fc11.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [petro@Workplace Desktop]$ + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec . + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines . + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [petro@Sulaco SOURCES]$ sha256sum mtkbabel-0.8.tar.gz* 591597c0787822c9fd56c7a3da214e81edd3c98f32d16858221e02dfc0f63779 mtkbabel-0.8.tar.gz 591597c0787822c9fd56c7a3da214e81edd3c98f32d16858221e02dfc0f63779 mtkbabel-0.8.tar.gz.1 [petro@Sulaco SOURCES]$ + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1575556 + The package owns all directories that it creates. + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). - The package must consistently use macros. So, I advice you to change "rm -rf %{buildroot}" to "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" in the %install section. + The package contains code, or permissible content. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. Please make a last change mentioned above regarding simultaneous using of %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT (easyfix). Fix it and proceed with the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CVS_admin_requests Please, also use This package is APPROVED
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: mtkbabel Short Description: Program to Operate the i-Blue 747 GPS Data Logger Owners: drindt Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: peter
CVS done.
mtkbabel-0.8-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mtkbabel-0.8-1.fc11
mtkbabel-0.8-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mtkbabel-0.8-1.fc10
mtkbabel-0.8-1.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
mtkbabel-0.8-1.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.