Spec URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/libspnav/libspnav.spec SRPM URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/libspnav/libspnav-0.2.2-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: The spacenav project provides a free, compatible alternative to the proprietary 3Dconnexion device driver and SDK, for their 3D input devices (called "space navigator", "space pilot", "space traveller", etc). This package provides the library needed for applications to connect to the user land daemon.
rpmlint output: $ ls *.rpm libspnav-0.2.2-1.fc15.src.rpm libspnav-0.2.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm libspnav-debuginfo-0.2.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm libspnav-devel-0.2.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm libspnav-static-0.2.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm $ rpmlint *.rpm libspnav.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spacenav -> spacemen libspnav.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US traveller -> traveler, traveled, traversal libspnav.src:43: W: rpm-buildroot-usage %build %configure --prefix=%{buildroot}%{_prefix} libspnav.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spacenav -> spacemen libspnav.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US traveller -> traveler, traveled, traversal libspnav-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
I can help review this.
Great! I've also got spacenavd and spnavcfg packaged but haven't submitted review requests just yet.
naming: ok license: BSD, ok sources: ok b85a0f4ab711e2d4f73a40e2e371f5ae libspnav-0.2.2.tar.gz scriptlets: ok 1. MUST: build doesn't use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. maybe use something like: --- configure.opt 2011-08-17 07:47:12.275486930 -0500 +++ configure 2011-08-17 07:52:24.599256027 -0500 @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ fi if [ "$OPT" = 'yes' ]; then - echo 'opt = -O3' >>Makefile + echo 'opt = -O3 $(RPM_OPT_FLAGS)' >>Makefile fi if [ "$X11" = 'yes' ]; then 2. MUST. static library build/packaged. Please provide justification/rationale for doing so, or remove it. 3. SHOULD. In %files, be explicit about what soname to package, so future abi bumps don't come as a surprise, use something like %files %{_libdir}/libspnav.so.0* instead? 4. SHOULD. Given all the configure/makefile hacks (optflags, DESTDIR, lib64) in the .spec, I'm wondering if it may be more worthwhile to make an upstreamable patch instead? I can help do that, if that's agreeable with you.
(In reply to comment #4) > 1. MUST: build doesn't use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. maybe use something like: > --- configure.opt 2011-08-17 07:47:12.275486930 -0500 > +++ configure 2011-08-17 07:52:24.599256027 -0500 > @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ > fi > > if [ "$OPT" = 'yes' ]; then > - echo 'opt = -O3' >>Makefile > + echo 'opt = -O3 $(RPM_OPT_FLAGS)' >>Makefile > fi > > if [ "$X11" = 'yes' ]; then I'll get this updated and see if a patch wouldn't be better then a bunch of sed hacks. I usually just sed update "CFLAGS =" to "CFLAGS +=" > 2. MUST. static library build/packaged. Please provide > justification/rationale for doing so, or remove it. Yeah, I was wondering about that. I only packaged it because it built it. I guess I just need to "rm -f" it so I don't get an "installed but unpackaged" error > 3. SHOULD. In %files, be explicit about what soname to package, so future abi > bumps don't come as a surprise, use something like > %files > %{_libdir}/libspnav.so.0* > instead? OK > 4. SHOULD. Given all the configure/makefile hacks (optflags, DESTDIR, lib64) > in the .spec, I'm wondering if it may be more worthwhile to make an > upstreamable patch instead? I can help do that, if that's agreeable with you. I'll ask but these makefiles are VERY simple and the packages have not been updated recently so I wonder how active upstream is. I'll post a new spec and SRPM shortly.
Spec URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/libspnav/libspnav.spec SRPM URL: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/libspnav/libspnav-0.2.2-2.fc15.src.rpm * Wed Aug 17 2011 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069> - 0.2.2-2 - Patched make file to honor Fedora CFLAGS defaults. - Removed static library package. - Other minor updates to the spec file. This addresses 1-3. If you want to help with the makefile that's great as I'm not an expert at it :)
good enough methinks, APPROVED.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: libspnav Short Description: Open source alternative to 3DConnextion drivers Owners: hobbes1069 Branches: f15 f16 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
libspnav-0.2.2-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libspnav-0.2.2-2.fc15
libspnav-0.2.2-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libspnav-0.2.2-2.fc16
libspnav-0.2.2-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.
libspnav-0.2.2-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.
libspnav-0.2.2-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: libspnav New Branches: el6 Owners: zultron hobbes1069 InitialCC: The owner of this package (hobbes1069) and I (zultron) are building this package for EPEL6.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: libspnav New Branches: epel7 Owners: zultron hobbes1069 InitialCC: