This is a strictly EPEL4 & EPEL5 package. It has been designed to coexist with the RHEL provided sqlite and not interfere with it in anyway. Spec URL: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/sqlite36/sqlite36.spec SRPM URL: http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/sqlite36/sqlite36-3.6.22-2.el5.src.rpm Description: SQLite is a C library that implements an SQL database engine. A large subset of SQL92 is supported. A complete database is stored in a single disk file. The API is designed for convenience and ease of use. Applications that link against SQLite can enjoy the power and flexibility of an SQL database without the administrative hassles of supporting a separate database server. Version 2 and version 3 binaries are named to permit each to be installed on a single host
PASS: rpmlint run on every package: $ rpmlint -i SPECS/sqlite36.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -i /var/lib/mock/epel-5-x86_64/result/sqlite36-3.6.22-2.el5.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -i /var/lib/mock/epel-5-x86_64/result/sqlite36-devel-3.6.22-2.el5.x86_64.rpm sqlite36-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. --- PASS: package is named according to guidelines (exception, multi-version pkg) PASS: spec file name matches base name (sqlite36.spec) --- FAIL: package does not fully meet guidelines reqarding Tcl extensions: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl#Naming_Conventions http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl#arch-specific_packages --- PASS: package is licensed with an approved license (Public Domain) PASS: spec file is written in American English PASS: spec file is legible --- PASS: sources match upstream: Source0: http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite-%{version}.tar.gz Source1: http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite_docs_%{docver}.zip $ curl -s http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite-3.6.22.tar.gz | md5sum ; md5sum SOURCES/sqlite-3.6.22.tar.gz a17bd53f1fde11f84adf79c6a1510ce5 - a17bd53f1fde11f84adf79c6a1510ce5 SOURCES/sqlite-3.6.22.tar.gz $ curl -s http://www.sqlite.org/sqlite_docs_3_6_22.zip | md5sum ; md5sum SOURCES/sqlite_docs_3_6_22.zip 665889e9de50136514aa267173066e96 - 665889e9de50136514aa267173066e96 SOURCES/sqlite_docs_3_6_22.zip --- PASS: package successfully compiles on atleast one primary arch (el5-x86_64) PASS: all build dependencies are listed PASS: spec file handles locales properly (no locale files) PASS: ldconfig is called in %post/%postun PASS: package does not bundle copes of system libraries PASS: package owns all directories it creates (none) PASS: files are not listed more than once PASS: permissions on files are set properly PASS: header files are in -devel PASS: doc files are in -doc PASS: no static files to package in -static PASS: library files are packages under base, .so without suffix under -devel PASS: -devel package requires base package PASS: package does not include any .la/.a files PASS: package does not own files/directories already owned by other packages PASS: all file names are UTF-8 --- ????: license file not included in source, should request upstream include it. PASS: the package builds in mock PASS: software functions as expected (calling sqlite36) ????: -doc sub package does not require base package PASS: pkgconfig files are packages under -devel --- Summary: Looks mostly good: FAIL: package does not fully meet guidelines reqarding Tcl extensions. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl#Naming_Conventions http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl#arch-specific_packages ????: License file is not included in source... SHOULD request that upstream includes it. ????: The -doc subpackage doesn't require the base package. Up to you if you want to change that, its not a MUST.
I am no longer interested in this package as I was only adding it to add svn16 package to EPEL and since that is now in RHEL5.6 this is no longer necessary. Thanks Brian for the review. Steve.