Spec URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/pyrasite.spec SRPM URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/pyrasite-2.0-0.1.beta3.fc16.src.rpm Description: Pyrasite uses gdb to inject code into a running Python process. It is comprised of a command-line tool, a Python API, and a graphical interface.
Newer SRPM: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/pyrasite-2.0-0.1.beta6.fc16.src.rpm
Latest: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/pyrasite-2.0-1.fc16.src.rpm http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/pyrasite.spec
Review checklist, last updated 2012-02-07 Based on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines Key: [X] passed, [F] failed, [-] irrelevant [X] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review. pyrasite.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pyrasite-shell pyrasite.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pyrasite-memory-viewer [X] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [X] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [X] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [F] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. License in code is GPLv3+, license in specfile is GPLv3 [X] 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. [X] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [X] 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. http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/pyrasite/pyrasite-2.0.tar.gz: 404 [X] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [-] 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. [X] 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. [-] 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 subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [X] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [-] 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. [X] 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. [X] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations) [X] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. [F] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. From [[Packaging:Guidelines#Macros]]: "Macro forms of system executables SHOULD NOT be used except when there is a need to allow the location of those executables to be configurable. For example, rm should be used in preference to %{__rm}, but %{__python} is acceptable." You use %{__make} and %{__gzip} which don't make any sense to be configurable. [X] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [X] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (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). [X] 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: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [-] MUST: Development files must be 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}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} [-] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. [-] 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. 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. [X] 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 filesystem 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. [X] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. Quick note -- you have Sphinx create documentation files, but those files aren't actually being included in the resulting binary RPM. Please fix: - license field in spec - 404 of upstream source - use of macros
(In reply to comment #3) > Quick note -- you have Sphinx create documentation files, but those files > aren't actually being included in the resulting binary RPM. I use Sphinx to create the man page. > Please fix: > - license field in spec Fixed. > - 404 of upstream source This will exist once this package is done and I release v2.0 > - use of macros Done. Updated: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/pyrasite.spec
APPROVED
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: pyrasite Short Description: Inject arbitrary code into running Python processes Owners: lmacken Branches: f16 f17 el6 el5 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
pyrasite-2.0-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyrasite-2.0-1.fc17
pyrasite-2.0-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyrasite-2.0-1.fc16
pyrasite-2.0-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyrasite-2.0-1.el6
pyrasite-2.0-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.
pyrasite-2.0-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
pyrasite-2.0-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.
pyrasite-2.0-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.