Spec URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/OSGi-bundle-ant-task/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.spec SRPM URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/OSGi-bundle-ant-task/OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.1svn1242.fc15.src.rpm Description: A wrapper around Bnd to allow easy bundle creation from ant builds
Updated package: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/OSGi-bundle-ant-task/OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.2svn1242.fc15.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/OSGi-bundle-ant-task/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.spec [ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/*.rpm ../SPECS/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.spec OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.2svn1242.fc15.src.rpm OSGi-bundle-ant-task.noarch: W: no-documentation OSGi-bundle-ant-task.src: W: invalid-url Source0: OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz ../SPECS/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz OSGi-bundle-ant-task.src: W: invalid-url Source0: OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
Stay tuned for a full review.
Koji scratch build for f15: <http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3205163 $ rpmlint -i -v * OSGi-bundle-ant-task.noarch: I: checking OSGi-bundle-ant-task.noarch: I: checking-url https://opensource.luminis.net/wiki/display/SITE/OSGi+Bundle+Ant+Task (timeout 10 seconds) OSGi-bundle-ant-task.noarch: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. OSGi-bundle-ant-task.src: I: checking OSGi-bundle-ant-task.src: I: checking-url https://opensource.luminis.net/wiki/display/SITE/OSGi+Bundle+Ant+Task (timeout 10 seconds) OSGi-bundle-ant-task.src: W: invalid-url Source0: OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. The package includes no documentation. No problem actually, because there are no docs provided by upstream. --------------------------------- 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 [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [x] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. Please add a license declaration file, which is available from here: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php [+] 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. The commands to create the tarball don't work on my system. I've used the following to checkout the appropriate svn revision: https://opensource.luminis.net/svn/BUNDLES/releases/build-plugin-0.2.0/ tar -cvzf OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz build-plugin-0.2.0/ $ md5sum * 17504d454b4d416fdb85ecf43df9ca3c OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz 14d31b67b02eb26bfbfc2b3823f49961 OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz.packaged The checksums don't match. What could be the problem here? [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. - Succesful Koji build available. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache must be updated. [.] 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: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled. [.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information, the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used. [+] 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: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), ... [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file [.] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. [+] 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 from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream... [+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See Koji build above (which uses mock anyway) [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. I assume the packager has tested it. Don't know how to test it on my system. [+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, 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 ... [.] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.
Hello, (In reply to comment #3) > [x] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must > be included in %doc. > Please add a license declaration file, which is available from here: > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php I extracted the license from the source java file into a separate file and added it as a source. > [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. > The commands to create the tarball don't work on my system. I've used the > following to checkout the appropriate svn revision: > > https://opensource.luminis.net/svn/BUNDLES/releases/build-plugin-0.2.0/ > tar -cvzf OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz build-plugin-0.2.0/ > > $ md5sum * > 17504d454b4d416fdb85ecf43df9ca3c OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz > 14d31b67b02eb26bfbfc2b3823f49961 OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz.packaged > > The checksums don't match. What could be the problem here? I'm not sure, I redid an svn checkout and got another md5sum :/ [ankur@ankur dump]$ md5sum OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz dbae4046553508212cbf4d75b943a859 OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz 14d31b67b02eb26bfbfc2b3823f49961 /home/ankur/rpmbuild/SOURCES/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz BTW, I missed a space in the command. It's meant to be: # svn export https://opensource.luminis.net/svn/BUNDLES/releases/build-plugin-0.2.0/ OSGi-bundle-ant-task I assure you that the directories are same, only the generated tars are different, which is causing the difference in checksum. [ankur@ankur dump]$ diff -ur OSGi-bundle-ant-task/ ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.orig/ [ankur@ankur dump]$ diff OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz Binary files OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz and /home/ankur/rpmbuild/SOURCES/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.tar.gz differ http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/OSGi-bundle-ant-task/OSGi-bundle-ant-task.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/OSGi-bundle-ant-task/OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.3.svn1242.fc15.src.rpm * Sun Jul 17 2011 Ankur Sinha <ankursinha AT fedoraproject DOT org> - 0.2.0-0.3.svn1242 - correct versioning - correct svn command - add license Thanks, Ankur
Even with the correct svn and tar commands, I get different checksums. Could be that tar doesn't work identically on different systems. No problem, I've compared the java files directly: $ md5sum * 755a23e6246628a9c0abfc7f6f8471bd BuildTask.java 755a23e6246628a9c0abfc7f6f8471bd BuildTask.java.orig OK, that's why ---------------- PACKAGE APPROVED ----------------
Thank you Mario!
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: OSGi-bundle-ant-task Short Description: A wrapper around Bnd to allow easy bundle creation from ant builds Owners: ankursinha Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC: susmit mrceresa
Git done (by process-git-requests).
OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.3.svn1242.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.3.svn1242.fc14
OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.3.svn1242.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.3.svn1242.fc15
OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.3.svn1242.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 testing repository.
OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.3.svn1242.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository.
OSGi-bundle-ant-task-0.2.0-0.3.svn1242.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.