Spec URL: http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/libmcs.spec SRPM URL: http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/libmcs-0.7.2-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: This is a Package Rename review request for the "mcs" package set in the Fedora package collection. It would have been possible to keep the old package base name and create [new/renamed] subpackages in the libmcs* namespace, but that would be less clean.
Spec URL: http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/libmcs.spec SRPM URL: http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/libmcs-0.7.2-2.fc14.src.rpm Update to let -utils subpackage require explicit EVR of base library package.
Hi Michael, the source archive provides a Doxyfile. It's probably a good idea to build the API documentation and add it to the devel package. The package looks good so far. If nobody else volunteers in the few days, I'll take the review.
> Doxyfile Sure, easy enough to use that in the spec. Generation of the docs has been missing ever since, and I've only taken over the package. ;)
The package looks fine. Especially, the Obsoletes/Provides fields are set properly. As I couldn't find any blockers, we can directly finish here. :) Adding the Doxygen docs would be a helpful improvement, and if upstream could provide manpages for the utils, this would also be appreciated of course. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-i386/result/*.rpm libmcs.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US userland -> user land, user-land, Sutherland libmcs.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US utils -> utile, utilizes, utilize libmcs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US userland -> user land, user-land, Sutherland libmcs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US utils -> utile, utilizes, utilize libmcs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mcs -> ms, cs, mics libmcs.src:82: W: macro-in-comment %{_sysconfdir} libmcs.src:83: W: macro-in-comment %{_sysconfdir} libmcs.src:84: W: macro-in-comment %{_sysconfdir} libmcs.src:95: W: macro-in-comment %config libmcs.src:95: W: macro-in-comment %{_sysconfdir} libmcs-devel.i686: W: no-documentation libmcs-utils.i686: W: no-documentation libmcs-utils.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/mcs-walk-config libmcs-utils.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mcs-query-backends libmcs-utils.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mcs-setconfval libmcs-utils.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mcs-info libmcs-utils.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mcs-getconfval libmcs-utils.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mcs-walk-config 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 18 warnings. All above warnings can be ignored: - spellling errors are false positive - warnings about macros in comments are expected and harmless - devel-file-in-non-devel-package is false positive - no manpages present in source archive --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. - BSD (3-clause variant) [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: When renaming an existing package, the Provides field must be properly set: Provides: oldpackagename = $provEVR - Provides properly set for all (sub)packages [+] MUST: When renaming an existing package, the Obsoletes field must be properly set: Obsoletes: oldpackagename < $obsEVR - Obsoletes properly set for all (sub)packages [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum libmcs-0.7.2.tbz2* 9fc91a8e860a0ab99316824aebb1d40a libmcs-0.7.2.tbz2 9fc91a8e860a0ab99316824aebb1d40a libmcs-0.7.2.tbz2.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. koji scratch build (f15): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2731019 [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [+] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [+] MUST: .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [+] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications ... [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [+] SHOULD: subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin ... [X] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. - it would be nice if upstream could add manpages for the utilities ---------------- Package APPROVED ----------------
Thank you very much, Martin! I will add the doxygen stuff (already have it added to my local copy). New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: libmcs Short Description: Configuration file abstraction library Owners: mschwendt Branches: f13 f14 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4352 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=11446