Spec URL: http://rpm.lubyte.de/yarssr/yarssr.spec SRPM URL: http://rpm.lubyte.de/yarssr/RPMS/noarch/yarssr-0.2.2-1.fc13.noarch.rpm Description: "Yet Another RSS Reader is an RSS aggregator and reader that displays its results in the GNOME notification area. To view the contents of the feed just click the menu-item and it will launch in your favorite browser. It is written in Perl and uses gtk2-perl for it's interface." Yarssr is a fine small tool for RSS feeds and there is no other program covers that in Fedora. rpmlint: > yarssr.i386: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US aggregator -> aggregation, aggregated, aggregate copy-paste from the website > yarssr.i386: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib ok, only Perl scripts > yarssr.i386: W: no-manual-page-for-binary yarssr yarssr doesn't provide man pages It's my first package. Requesting a Sponsor.
I'm not a sponsor, so I can't officially review this package, but here are a couple comments that I hope will help clean up the spec a bit. - All Requires on one line is not legible, please put one per line. - It's better to use Requires on virtual perl Provides (eg. perl(XML::RSS) rather than perl-XML-RSS) - Most of the explicit perl Requires can probably be automatically detected, please check after building and remove unneeded ones accordingly. - Align tags values, it will be more legible imho. - According to comments in the script, License is GPL, not GPLv2+. - Replace Source with Source0. - Source URL is not the canonical format for SourceForge URLs. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Sourceforge.net - BuildRoot is not mandatory anymore, but can still be useful if you want to have EPEL branches. Same for the %clean section. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag On the same topic, buildroot needs to be cleaned at the start of the %install section in EPEL : rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT Choose one case or the other and make the spec consistent. - BuildArchitectures is usually written as BuildArch. - Tag order is currently a bit messy, a better order could be : Name, Version, Release, Summary, Group, License, URL, Source, BuildRoot, BuildArch - PREFIX=/usr should be PREFIX=%{_prefix} - RPM_OPT_FLAGS is unneeded, this is a noarch package - Don't generate the desktop file in the spec, add it as Source1. - Use macros in the %files section : - /usr/bin --> %{_bindir} - /usr/share --> %{_datadir} - /usr/lib --> %{_libdir} - Replace /usr/share/yarssr/* with %{_datadir}/yarss or even %{_datadir}/%{name}, all files below the dir will be owned w/o the need of the wildcard. - /usr/share/locale/en/LC_MESSAGES/yarssr.mo should already be taken care of by %find_lang, remove it from the %file section.
Updated the spec File under http://rpm.lubyte.de/yarssr/yarssr.spec Sources can be found here: http://rpm.lubyte.de/yarssr/SOURCES/ the new package at: http://rpm.lubyte.de/yarssr/RPMS/noarch/yarssr-0.2.2-1.fc13.noarch.rpm rmplint output: [crash@homebox ~]$ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/yarssr-0.2.2-1.fc13.noarch.rpm yarssr.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US aggregator -> aggregation, aggregated, aggregate yarssr.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL yarssr.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib yarssr.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary yarssr 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings
Hey, just some small hints: - please try rpmlint -i. This gives you some really useful hints. - Are you really sure, your rpm is a SRPM? - when updateing the spec, you should increase the release - are you sure, this is really supported? Last version dates from 2005! It looks to me like a dead prject.
More comments : - License is actually GPL+, sorry for my earlier misleading comment. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing - Use the most compressed source, here .tar.bz2 rather than.tar.gz https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL - Use parallel make when building. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Parallel_make - Missing BuildRequires: gettext. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files - Missing BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage - According to desktop-file-validate, the desktop file has a few issues : yarssr.desktop: warning: key "Encoding" in group "Desktop Entry" is deprecated yarssr.desktop: warning: value "Application;Network;" for key "Categories" in group "Desktop Entry" contains a deprecated value "Application" yarssr.desktop: error: value "text/html" for string list key "MimeType" in group "Desktop Entry" does not have a semicolon (';') as trailing character - The package must not own %{_datadir}/applications, only the desktop file. - %defattr is not correct. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions - The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. - When submitting a package for review, you need to provide the spec file and the source rpm, not the binary rpm. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Contributor - You must add a changelog entry and bump the release tag accordingly every time you submit a modified version of your package.
What is the status of this bug?
Again ping?
ping again??
I will close this bug as NOTABUG if no response from the reporter is received within ONE WEEK.
Once closing. If someone wants to import this package into Fedora, please open a new review request and mark this bug as a duplicate of the new one. Thank you!