Spec URL: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/lockfile-progs.spec SRPM URL: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/lockfile-progs-0.1.13-4.fc13.src.rpm Description: Lockfile-progs provide a method to lock and unlock mailboxes and files safely (via liblockfile).
I do not see liblockfile in repos. It is listed in BuildRequires. Where you got it? Do you plan add it on review too?
I've sent liblockfile as review too, just a few seconds ago. cf. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=601577
I've updated the spec-file slightly. Revision -2 is here: SPEC: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/lockfile-progs.spec SRPM: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/lockfile-progs-0.1.13-2.fc13.src.rpm
A new version from upstream. Should have checked this five minutes earlier. SRPM: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/lockfile-progs-0.1.15-1.fc13.src.rpm SPEC: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/lockfile-progs.spec rpmlint /home/mrunge/rpmbuild/SRPMS/lockfile-progs-0.1.15-1.fc13.src.rpm /home/mrunge/rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/lockfile-progs-0.1.15-1.fc13.i686.rpm /home/mrunge/rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/lockfile-progs-debuginfo-0.1.15-1.fc13.i686.rpm lockfile-progs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblockfile -> blockbusting, blockbuster, Blockbuster lockfile-progs.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblockfile -> blockbusting, blockbuster, Blockbuster 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. I'm sure, those warning can be ignored.
Why you provide URL to Debian package but not upstream page? Is upstream alive?
Here are some more quick comments: - replace "make" with make %{_smp_mflags} CFLAGS='%{optflags}' and move it to the %build section - in order to ensure that symbolic links are created, add sed -i 's/\(cd bin && ln \)/\1 -sf /' Makefile before the call of make (or patch the Makefile appropriately) - I suggest to replace %{__mkdir} and %{__cp} with plain mkdir and cp, respectively - add COPYING as %doc - be more specific when adding the man pages: %{_mandir}/man1/*.1*
The "make check" target looks suitable for a %check section. > I suggest to replace %{__mkdir} and %{__cp} with plain mkdir and cp, > respectively *Highly* recommended, especially since the "Makefile" doesn't use those RPM macros either. (btw, %{__mkdir_p} would also exist :-p) > CFLAGS='%{optflags}' Strictly necessary as else it won't use Fedora's global flags.
(In reply to comment #5) > Why you provide URL to Debian package but not upstream page? Is upstream alive? Afaik, it is a package, developed for debian, source is provided via debians pages. Upstream is definitely not dead. There is a bugtracker upstream, http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rlb%40defaultvalue.org
Thank you for your remarks. I took them and changed the spec according to them. [mrunge@sofja SPECS]$ diff -u lockfile-progs.spec.orig lockfile-progs.spec --- lockfile-progs.spec.orig 2010-08-14 19:18:37.095702770 +0200 +++ lockfile-progs.spec 2010-08-14 21:10:13.654660407 +0200 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ Name: lockfile-progs Version: 0.1.15 -Release: 1%{?dist} +Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: Command-line programs to safely lock and unlock files and mailboxes License: GPLv2 @@ -18,17 +18,20 @@ %prep %setup -q -n sid +sed -i 's/\(cd bin && ln \)/\1 -sf /' Makefile %build +make %{_smp_mflags} CFLAGS='%{optflags}' +%check +make check %install rm -rf %{buildroot} -make -%{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}/%{_bindir} -%{__cp} -r --preserve=all bin/* %{buildroot}/%{_bindir} -%{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1 -%{__cp} -r --preserve=all man/* %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1/ +mkdir -p %{buildroot}/%{_bindir} +cp -r --preserve=all bin/* %{buildroot}/%{_bindir} +mkdir -p %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1 +cp -r --preserve=all man/* %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1/ %clean rm -rf %{buildroot} @@ -42,10 +45,15 @@ %{_bindir}/mail-lock %{_bindir}/mail-touchlock %{_bindir}/mail-unlock -%{_mandir}/man?/* - +%{_mandir}/man1/*.1* +%doc COPYING %changelog +* Sat Aug 14 2010 Matthias Runge <mrunge> 0.1.15-2 +- correct make-invocation, move it to build +- COPYING in as doc +- remove {__-invocations, replace by plain calls + * Fri Aug 13 2010 Matthias Runge <mrunge> 0.1.15-1 - new version from upstream new updated SPEC and SRPM: SPEC: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/lockfile-progs.spec SRPM: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc13.src.rpm
Looks good. You don't need BuildRoot: anymore so that can be removed. Other than that APPROVED + rpmlint output $ rpmlint lockfile-progs.spec lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14.src.rpm lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14.x86_64.rpm lockfile-progs-debuginfo-0.1.15-2.fc14.x86_64.rpm lockfile-progs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblockfile -> blockbusting, blockbuster, Blockbuster lockfile-progs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US liblockfile -> blockbusting, blockbuster, Blockbuster 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. + package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines + specfile name matches the package base name + package should satisfy packaging guidelines + license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora + license matches the actual package license + latest version packaged + %doc includes license file + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible + upstream sources match sources in the srpm abfcda83a1868073673f4d78066b8f8a lockfile-progs_0.1.15.tar.gz + package successfully builds on at least one architecture tested using koji scratch build + BuildRequires list all build dependencies n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/* n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun+ does not use Prefix: /usr n/a package owns all directories it creates n/a no duplicate files in %files + Package perserves timestamps on install Permissions on files must be set properly + %defattr line + consistent use of macros + package must contain code or permissible content n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage + files marked %doc should not affect package runtime n/a header files should be in -devel n/a static libraries should be in -static n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig' n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel n/a devel must require the fully versioned base n/a packages should not contain libtool .la files n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file + packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages + filenames must be valid UTF-8 Optional: n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream to include it n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if available + reviewer should build the package in mock/koji n/a the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures n/a review should test the package functions as described + scriptlets should be sane n/a non -devel packages should require fully versioned base n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel + shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin + Package should have man files
(In reply to comment #10) > Looks good. You don't need BuildRoot: anymore so that can be removed. Other It is still required for EPEL 5 & 4.
Thanks for the review. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: lockfile-progs Short Description: safely lock and unlock files Owners: mrunge Branches: F-13, F-14, devel, EL-5, EL-6
Git done (by process-git-requests).
lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14
lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc13
lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 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 lockfile-progs'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14
lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.el5
lockfile-progs-0.1.15-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: lockfile-progs New Branches: epel7 Owners: mrunge
please ignore #c23