Spec URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libtpcmisc/libtpcmisc.spec SRPM URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libtpcmisc/libtpcmisc-1.4.8-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Former libpet, the common PET C library, has been divided up in smaller sub-libraries that each handle a specific task. This library includes miscellaneous functions utilized in PET data processing. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ rpmlint solutions: [ankur@ankur ~]$ rpmlint /tmp/mock-repo/libtpcmisc-* ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/libtpcmisc.spec libtpcmisc.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpet -> limpet, lib pet, lib-pet libtpcmisc.i686: W: no-documentation libtpcmisc.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary libtpcmisc libtpcmisc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpet -> limpet, lib pet, lib-pet libtpcmisc-devel.i686: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
I'm guessing that your current/future review requests will be the only users of this (and the other related) packages but I figured I'd see what I could do about the no-documentation. Both packages have a few documentation files (Readme, History, one of them has TODO) so that takes care of the main package. I also noticed the a doxygen configuration file in both packages and I haven't messed with them before so I decided to see if I could figure it out. The only wrinkle is you have to use a trick to get it to install the documentation to the right directory because the default in Doxyfile was stupid. Also, when you have a -devel package that's architecture specific the Requires: should also be architecture specific, i.e.: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} More to come.
Ok, after adding the documentation rpmlint complained about line endings and encodings so I fixed that as well. Here's the updated spec, feel free to alter as you see fit! http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/libtpcmisc.spec The only other oddity (which we really can't fix) is that the binary name "libtpcmisc" is, well, a binary, and not a library and it doesn't have a man page. In this particular case I think we can live with that since this package has a VERY small target audience. Of course if would be good to get upstream to update the FSF address, but I'm assuming upstream is dead?
(In reply to comment #1) > I'm guessing that your current/future review requests will be the only users of > this (and the other related) packages but I figured I'd see what I could do > about the no-documentation. > I'm pretty sure they're the only users.. :D > Both packages have a few documentation files (Readme, History, one of them has > TODO) so that takes care of the main package. > > I also noticed the a doxygen configuration file in both packages and I haven't > messed with them before so I decided to see if I could figure it out. The only > wrinkle is you have to use a trick to get it to install the documentation to > the right directory because the default in Doxyfile was stupid. > > Also, when you have a -devel package that's architecture specific the Requires: > should also be architecture specific, i.e.: > > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} Ah. Okay. I'm not up to date on the %{?_isa} macro. I'll go read up on it. > > More to come.
(In reply to comment #2) > Ok, after adding the documentation rpmlint complained about line endings and > encodings so I fixed that as well. Here's the updated spec, feel free to alter > as you see fit! > > http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/libtpcmisc.spec I've picked it entirely :P > > The only other oddity (which we really can't fix) is that the binary name > "libtpcmisc" is, well, a binary, and not a library and it doesn't have a man > page. > > In this particular case I think we can live with that since this package has a > VERY small target audience. > > Of course if would be good to get upstream to update the FSF address, but I'm > assuming upstream is dead? I'm shooting off a mail to upstream. However, I'm pretty sure this stuff is not maintained any more so the chances of anything happening are meek. Thanks for the corrections, I'm just rebuilding and posting the new packages. Ankur
http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libtpcmisc/libtpcmisc-1.4.8-2.fc15.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libtpcmisc/libtpcmisc.spec Thanks! Ankur
Ok, just about there! I tried building under mock and noticed that there was a problem building the doxygen documentation. We were missing graphviz int eh BuildRequires. After I added that everything looks good. Here's the update BR line: BuildRequires: doxygen graphviz dos2unix rpmlint output of new packages: $ rpmlint libtpcmisc-*.x86_64.rpm libtpcmisc.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpet -> limpet, lib pet, lib-pet libtpcmisc.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary libtpcmisc 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Just add graphviz and we're good to go. Now I just have to do the full guidelines check.
hello!! Added the graphviz BR. http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libtpcmisc/libtpcmisc.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/libtpcmisc/libtpcmisc-1.4.8-3.fc15.src.rpm Thanks, Ankur
Ok, everything looks good. I noticed that upstream has gone to version 1.4.9. Probably wouldn't be a bad idea to update your package before checking it in. +: OK -: must be fixed =: should be fixed (at your discretion) ?: Question or clairification needed N: not applicable MUST: [+] rpmlint output: shown in comment: No unexpected output [+] follows package naming guidelines [+] spec file base name matches package name [+] package meets the packaging guidelines [+] package uses a Fedora approved license: LGPLv2+ [+] license field matches the actual license. [N] license file is included in %doc: [+] spec file is in American English [+] spec file is legible [+] sources match upstream: md5sums match: a64787a2a98ec8d7dded6af9c5fc82a8 [+] package builds on at least one primary arch: Tested F14/F15 [N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch [+] all build requirements in BuildRequires [N] spec file handles locales properly [N] ldconfig in %post and %postun [+] no bundled copies of system libraries [N] no relocatable packages [N] package owns all directories that it creates [+] no files listed twice in %files [+] proper permissions on files [+] consistent use of macros [+] code or permissible content [N] large documentation in -doc [+] no runtime dependencies in %doc [+] header files in -devel [+] static libraries in -static: In -devel with -statis Provides [+] .so in -devel [+] -devel requires main package [+] package contains no libtool archives [N] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install/validate [+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages [+] all filenames in UTF-8 SHOULD: [N] query upstream for license text [N] description and summary contains available translations [+] package builds in mock [+] package builds on all supported arches [?] package functions as described: Did not test. [+] sane scriptlets [N] subpackages require the main package (other than -devel) [N] placement of pkgconfig files [N] file dependencies versus package dependencies [=] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts: *** APPROVED ***
Thank you for the review Richard :) I'll update. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: libtpcmisc Short Description: Miscellaneous PET functions Owners: ankursinha Branches: f14 f15 f16 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
libtpcmisc-1.4.8-3.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libtpcmisc-1.4.8-3.fc15
libtpcmisc-1.4.8-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libtpcmisc-1.4.8-3.fc16
libtpcmisc-1.4.8-3.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libtpcmisc-1.4.8-3.fc14
Built and pushed to repos. Closing.
libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc14, libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc14,libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc14
libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc16, libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc16,libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc16
libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc15, libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc15,libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc15
libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc15, libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc14, libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
libtpcimgio-1.5.10-4.fc16, libtpcmisc-1.4.8-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.