Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert.spec SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert-2.0.7-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: This package contains the massxpert mass spectrometric software suite, a software program that aims at letting users predict/analyze mass spectrometric data on (bio)polymers. URL: http://massxpert.org/ $ rpmlint massxpert.spec massxpert-2.0.7-1.fc11.src.rpm x86_64/massxpert-* massxpert.spec:70: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/massxpert/ massxpert.src:70: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/massxpert/ 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. Builds in koji dist-f13: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1765466 There *HAS* to be this hardcoded path, because on my 64bit system, this programm will look anyway in /usr/lib/ subdir for plugins. I notified upstream via mail for this.
I patched the cmakelist for 'proper' installing into the usual %{_libdir}. rpmlint is clean: $ rpmlint massxpert.spec massxpert-2.0.7-2.fc11.src.rpm x86_64/massxpert-* 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Builds in koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1766029 Anything ready for review. Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert.spec SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert-2.0.7-2.fc11.src.rpm
- Release 2.0.9 is out - Your are mixing '$RPM_BUILD_ROOT' and '%{buildroot}'. - In 2.0.9 is a huge usermanual. Perhaps it would be a good idea to make a separate package for that.
- update to new release - only using %{buildroot} - usermanual in subpackage rpmlint clean (warning: build hangs a bit, esp. on the last file, building with c++. When waiting long enought, it's sucessfull... http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1885132 ) Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert.spec SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert-2.0.9-1.fc12.src.rpm
- upstream release is now 2.1.0
Thanks, updated to 2.1.0 Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert.spec SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert-2.1.0-1.fc12.src.rpm
Review: massxper Date: 19th March 2010 Koji Build: Seems to be timing out :-( * COMMENT: rpmlint output $ rpmlint ../SRPMS/massxpert-2.1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/massxpert-doc-2.1.0-1.fc14.noarch.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/massxpert-2.1.0-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/massxpert-debuginfo-2.1.0-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm massxpert.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spectrometric -> spectrometer, spectroscopic, spectroscopy massxpert.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spectrometric -> spectrometer, spectroscopic, spectroscopy * YES: Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. * YES: spec file name same as base package %{name}. * YES: Packaging Guidelines. Very clean packages * YES: Approved license in .spec file. GPLv3 * YES: License on Source code. Extremly clear licensing in source as GPLv3. * YES: Include LICENSE file or similar if it exist. COPYING file present. * YES: Written in American English. * YES: Spec file legible. * YES: Included source must match upstream source. $ md5sum massxpert-2.1.0.tar.gz SOURCES/massxpert-2.1.0.tar.gz 50ee3fecfac0ad047004748971a1f1c0 massxpert-2.1.0.tar.gz 50ee3fecfac0ad047004748971a1f1c0 SOURCES/massxpert-2.1.0.tar.gz * YES: Build on one architecture. mock * YES: Not building on an architecture must highlighted. mock. * YES: Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. mock. * NO: Handle locales properly. /usr/share/massxpert/locales /usr/share/massxpert/locales/massxpert_fr.qm could be handled better. * YES: ldconfig must be called on shared libs. No shared libs. * YES: No bundled copies of system libraries. * YES: Package must state why relocatable if relocatable. not relocatable. * MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates /usr/share/applications/ owned by filesystem /usr/share/pixmaps/ ownded by filesystem. * YES: No duplicate files in %files listings. * YES: Permissions on files must be set properly. %defattr %defattr(-,root,root,-) * YES: %clean section contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). * YES: Each package must consistently use macros. * YES: The package must contain code, or permissable content. * YES: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. Been put in seperate noarch package. * YES: %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. * YES: Header files must be in a -devel package. - no header files. * YES: Static libraries must be in a -static package. no statics. * YES: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' no .pc files. * YES: Then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. .so files but these are a plugin. * YES: devel packages must require the exact base package no -devel. * YES: No .la libtool archives * YES: GUI apps should have %{name}.desktop file * YES: No files or directories already owned by other packages. * YES: %install must run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). * YES: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. ----------- Comments: Could you rewrite the description just to avoid the word spectrometric? Work to be done: Just that one locale file should be handled.
Sorry, it took a bit longer... Thanks for the review. (In reply to comment #6) > Review: massxper > Date: 19th March 2010 > Koji Build: Seems to be timing out :-( I build this with ccache & rpmbuild: real 2m11.115s user 1m18.720s sys 1m25.074s So it can take a while ;) Koji build successfull http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2079497 > > * COMMENT: rpmlint output > $ rpmlint ../SRPMS/massxpert-2.1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm > ../RPMS/noarch/massxpert-doc-2.1.0-1.fc14.noarch.rpm > ../RPMS/x86_64/massxpert-2.1.0-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm > ../RPMS/x86_64/massxpert-debuginfo-2.1.0-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm > massxpert.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spectrometric -> > spectrometer, spectroscopic, spectroscopy > massxpert.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spectrometric -> > spectrometer, spectroscopic, spectroscopy Completely rewrite (with help from upstream website): $ rpmlint massxpert-2.1.0-2.fc13.src.rpm noarch/massxpert-doc-2.1.0-2.fc13.noarch.rpm x86_64/massxpert-2.1.0-2.fc13.x86_64.rpm x86_64/massxpert-debuginfo-2.1.0-2.fc13.x86_64.rpm 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. > * NO: Handle locales properly. > > /usr/share/massxpert/locales > /usr/share/massxpert/locales/massxpert_fr.qm > > could be handled better. Now the %files section looks a bit nasty, but don't know how to do it different... Was is that, what you meant? %doc %lang(fr) %{_datadir}/massxpert/locales/massxpert_fr.qm > ----------- > > Comments: > Could you rewrite the description just to avoid the word spectrometric? > > Work to be done: > Just that one locale file should be handled. %changelog - rewrite description to make rpmlint silent - renew %%files (better handle locales) Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert.spec SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/massxpert-2.1.0-2.fc13.src.rpm
Hi, I should have referenced the guidelines on locale stuff. See here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files
When adding a '%find_lang %{name} --all-name': + /usr/lib/rpm/find-lang.sh /home/tom/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/massxpert-2.1.0-2.fc13.x86_64 massxpert --all-name No translations found for massxpert in /home/tom/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/massxpert-2.1.0-2.fc13.x86_64 '%find_lang %{name}_fr' doesn't make sense for me, isn't it? The locales are handled internally, it seems, so I don't know how to threaden with them... Or am I doing something wrong?
I no longer want to maintain this, because I don't use this and just wanted to help the reporter from #501192. But it seems, this could still take some time to get this into fedora. Anyone feel free to use the spec file from above. Thanks for starting the review.