MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review.

[thomas@tusdell ~]$ rpmlint srpm-review-test/php-pecl-gmagick.spec
srpm-review-test/php-pecl-gmagick.spec: E: specfile-error sh: php-config: command not found
srpm-review-test/php-pecl-gmagick.spec: E: specfile-error error: Macro %php_extdir has empty body
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.


-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

(In reply to comment #1)
> sh: php-config:
> command not found

You simply does not have php-devel installed. If you install this package erro must be gone. php-devel listed as BR, so nothing error there.

Author include license by my request and update tarball.

http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora11/php-pecl-gmagick/php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-2.fc11.src.rpm

I will do a full review of this later today.

OK: rpmlint must be run on every package

rpmlint rpmbuild/SRPMS/php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-2.fc11.src.rpm rpmbuild/RPMS/i586/php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-2.fc11.i586.rpm 
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK: The spec file name must match the base package
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
OK: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license
OK: License text included
OK: The spec file must be written in American English
FIX: The spec file for the package MUST be legible
OK: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture
N\A: ExcludeArch
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
N\A: The spec file MUST handle locales properly
N\A: Must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
N\A: If the package is designed to be relocatable
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly
OK: Each package must have a %clean section
FIX: Each package must consistently use macros
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content
N\A: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage
OK: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application
N\A: Header files must be in a -devel package
N\A: Static libraries must be in a -static package
N\A: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
N\A: Library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package
N\A: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package
OK: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives
N\A: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file
OK: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages
OK: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8


Issues to fix.

* Consistent use of macros
 - if using the %{__make} style macros then you need to be consistent, i.e use %{__install}, %{__rm}, %{__chmod} etc

* Make the spec more eligible by formatting it correctly, at the moment the directives at the top are not aligned.

(In reply to comment #5)
> * Consistent use of macros
>  - if using the %{__make} style macros then you need to be consistent, i.e use
> %{__install}, %{__rm}, %{__chmod} etc
%{__make} replaced to plain make.

Additionally %{?_smp_mflags} added.

> * Make the spec more eligible by formatting it correctly, at the moment the
> directives at the top are not aligned.  
Top directives are ALIGNED with tabs by width 5 spaces. Please read my first post.

http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora11/php-pecl-gmagick/php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc11.src.rpm

The %{__make} install needs to be fixed as well, you can do that before requesting CVS

-------------------------------------------------------------------
    This package (php-pecl-gmagick) is APPROVED by topdog
-------------------------------------------------------------------

(In reply to comment #7)
> The %{__make} install needs to be fixed as well, you can do that before
> requesting CVS

Upss, sorry. Thanks, I'll fix it.

> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>     This package (php-pecl-gmagick) is APPROVED by topdog
> -------------------------------------------------------------------  

Thank you for review.

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: php-pecl-gmagick
Short Description: Provides a wrapper to the GraphicsMagick library
Owners: hubbitus
Branches: F-10 F-11 F-12 EL-5
InitialCC:

cvs done.

php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc11

php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.el5

php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
 If you want to test the update, you can install it with 
 su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update php-pecl-gmagick'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EL-5/FEDORA-EPEL-2009-0795

php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc12

php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.