Spec URL:http://siddharths.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/zhu3d.spec SRPM URL: http://siddharths.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/zhu3d-4.2.2-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Zhu3D is an interactive OpenGL-based mathematical function viewer. You can visualize functions, parametric systems and Iso-surfaces. The viewer supports special effects like animation, morphing, transparency, textures, fog and motion blur
*** Bug 672017 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I'll take this one, expect my review this afternoon. (US-EST)
================================ Key: [P] Pass [F] Fail See [n] [-] Not applicable [?] Questions (see comments) ================================ [F] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. zhu3d.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 4.2.4-1 zhu3d.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zhu3d incoherent-version-in-changelog - should be 4.2.2-1 Man page warning can safely be ignored. [P] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [P] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [P] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [P] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [P] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [P] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [P] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [P] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [F] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. d80f60ef45a1bdf6bb4aef1103d931fe zhu3d-4.2.2.tar.gz a37c23ea8b548f05f342486f711e45ba zhu3d-4.2.2.tar.gz(2) SRPM must contain the same tarball which can be downloaded from the upstream source. Tar file included in SRPM also refuses to extract. [F] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. Fails to build in mock. (See missing BuildRequires:) [-] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. [F] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. Missing BuildRequires: dos2unix [-] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/[ ] is strictly forbidden. [-] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or sub package) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [-] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. [P] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for examples. [P] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [F] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. Default attributes in %files is listed twice. %defattr(-,root,root,-), is correct and %defattr(-,root,root), is incorrect. The later listing can be removed. [P] MUST: The %clean section is not required for F-13 and above. Each package for EPEL MUST have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). If you do not plan to build this package for EPEL this section can be safely removed. [F] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. Several references to /usr/share should be exchanged with %{_datadir} Several references to /usr/bin should be changed to %{_bindir} zhu3d in several locations can be changed to %{name} [P] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. [-] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc sub package. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity) [P] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. [-] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [-] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [-] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). [-] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [-] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} [-] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be removed in the spec. [?] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file,and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. This is described in detail in the desktop files section of the Packaging Guidelines. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. Both desktop-file-install and desktop-file-validate are used. This is not necessary, desktop-file-install will validate the file, desktop-file-validate can be safely removed. [?] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the file system or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. Will check once package successfully builds. [P] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} ( or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ). (For EPEL Only) If you do not intend to build this package for EPEL this section can be safely removed. [P] MUST: All file names in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. SHOULD Items: [F] Should build in mock. [F] Should build on all supported archs [-] Should function as described. [-] Should have sane scriptlets. [-] Should have sub packages require base package with fully versioned depend. [P] Should have dist tag [P] Should package latest version [P] Check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews) Fix the above issues and I will continue the review of areas which could not be addressed due to the failure to build from source. Don't forget to bump the release up one.
Just noticed something I overlooked. In your %files section you have "%{_datadir}/applications/". This must be removed as it causes the package to own that directory. Which should be owned by the system not the package.
Changes done Spec URL: http://siddharths.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/zhu3d.spec SRPM URL: http://siddharths.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/zhu3d-4.2.2-2.fc14.src.rpm Fixed Above issues please continue review so rectify it further :)
The published spec link does not reflect changes, however, the spec contained in the SRPM shows the corrections. [P] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the review. zhu3d.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zhu3d (Ignorable warning) [P] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2750670 [P] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. [P] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. d80f60ef45a1bdf6bb4aef1103d931fe zhu3d-4.2.2.tar.gz(1) d80f60ef45a1bdf6bb4aef1103d931fe zhu3d-4.2.2.tar.gz(2) Tarball inside srpm still refuses to extract. gzip: stdin has more than one entry--rest ignored /bin/gtar: Child returned status 2 /bin/gtar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now [P] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. Corrected within SRPM spec. [P] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [P] Should build in mock. [P] Should build on all supported archs. == Approved ==
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: zhu3d Short Description: Zhu3D is an interactive OpenGL-based mathematical function viewer.You can visualize functions, parametric systems and Iso-surfaces. The viewer supports special effects like animation, morphing, transparency, textures, fog and motion blur Owners: siddharths Branches: f14 InitialCC:
(In reply to comment #6) > The published spec link does not reflect changes, however, the spec contained > in the SRPM shows the corrections. > > [P] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be > posted in the review. > > zhu3d.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zhu3d > (Ignorable warning) > > [P] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary > rpms on at least one primary architecture. > > Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2750670 > > > [P] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should > be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section > must include a %defattr(...) line. > > [P] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream > source, as provided in the spec URL. > > d80f60ef45a1bdf6bb4aef1103d931fe zhu3d-4.2.2.tar.gz(1) > d80f60ef45a1bdf6bb4aef1103d931fe zhu3d-4.2.2.tar.gz(2) > > Tarball inside srpm still refuses to extract. > > gzip: stdin has more than one entry--rest ignored > /bin/gtar: Child returned status 2 > /bin/gtar: Error is not recoverable: exiting now > > [P] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the > macros section of Packaging Guidelines. > > Corrected within SRPM spec. > > [P] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by > other packages. > > [P] Should build in mock. > [P] Should build on all supported archs. > > > == Approved == Thanks alot for the review :)
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: zhu3d Short Description: Zhu3D is an OpenGL-based mathematical function viewer. Owners: siddharths Branches: f14 InitialCC:
The requested package name does not meet the package name in the summary of this ticket. Please fix one or the other and re-raise the fedora-cvs flag.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: zhu3d Short Description: zhu3D is an OpenGL-based mathematical function viewer. Owners: siddharths Branches: f14 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).