Hide Forgot
SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/erlang-meck-0.5-1.fc14.src.rpm SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/erlang-meck.spec Description: With meck you can easily mock modules in Erlang. Since meck is intended to be used in testing, you can also perform some basic validations on the mocked modules, such as making sure no function is called in a way it should not.
I'll review it
REVIEW: Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable + rpmlint is not silent but these messages should be omitted in case of Erlang package (we're installing noarch package into arch-dependent directory - that's intentional) sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint ../RPMS/ppc/erlang-meck-0.5-1.fc15.ppc.rpm erlang-meck.ppc: E: no-binary erlang-meck.ppc: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (Apacke Software License 2.0). + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc. + The spec file is written in American English. + The spec file for the package is legible. - The sources used to build the package, must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL but I failed to download them using the URL from spec. + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. 0 No need to handle locales. 0 No shared library files. + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. + The package is not designed to be relocatable. +/- The package owns all directories that it creates but you'd better to drop empty "include" directory from package. + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissible content. 0 No extremely large documentation files. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. 0 No header files. 0 No static libraries. 0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files. 0 The package doesn't contain library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1). 0 No devel sub-package. + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. 0 Not a GUI application. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. Bottom line for all that: * please, correct URL for Source0 * remove empty and useless "include" directory in the %files section (looks like a leftover) * consider updating to the released recently 0.6.
Ping.
Ping again.
Sorry for the delay. SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/erlang-meck-0.7.1-1.el6.src.rpm SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/erlang-meck.spec
Ok, good. This package is APPROVED.
Thank you. Peter, I see that you maintain a lot of erlang stuff, I hope you won't mind being added as comaintainer. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: erlang-meck Short Description: A mocking library for Erlang Owners: lkundrak peter Branches: f15 f16 el6 f17
Git done (by process-git-requests).
Thank you. Imported and built.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: erlang-meck New Branches: el5 Owners: lkundrak peter