Spec URL: http://lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/novacom.spec SRPM URL: http://lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/novacom-1.1.0-0.1.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc16.src.rpm Description: This utility allows you to connect to WebOS devices that are connected over USB. You must have novacomd installed to use it
As I wrote in bug 809114, a Requires on novacomd should be add to this package. By the way, I would update the description to specify that the novacomd service must be enabled.
Updated package. Spec URL: http://lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/novacom-client.spec SRPM URL: http://lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/novacom-client-1.1.0-0.2.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc16.src.rpm This adds the novaterm command which allows you to open a shell on the WebOS device, and also renames the package in accordance with https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=809114#c8. A metapackage named 'novacom' is included that brings in both the server and the client. The 'novacom' package description specifies that the novacomd service must be started.
(In reply to comment #1) > As I wrote in bug 809114, a Requires on novacomd should be add to this package. > By the way, I would update the description to specify that the novacomd service > must be enabled. This comment can be ignored, see bug #809114 for details. You should add a comment to describe the way the sources can be retrieved, or provide a direct URL to get them (as in novacom-server). You should use %global instead of %define here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define Since gcc is part of the implicit BuildRequires, you don't need to add glibc-devel to the list of BR: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Exceptions_2 It looks like the client sources include parts of libtomcrypt (see files src/base64.*). Fortunately, they're not used by novacom. I wonder if it's worth deleting them.
(In reply to comment #3) > You should add a comment to describe the way the sources can be retrieved, or > provide a direct URL to get them (as in novacom-server). Fixed. Unfortunately, openwebos hasn't done a release of novacom (unlike novacom-server). > You should use %global instead of %define here: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define Fixed. > Since gcc is part of the implicit BuildRequires, you don't need to add > glibc-devel to the list of BR: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Exceptions_2 Fixed. > It looks like the client sources include parts of libtomcrypt (see files > src/base64.*). Fortunately, they're not used by novacom. I wonder if it's worth > deleting them. I figured it was worth it, so I went ahead and patched src/base64* out of the makefile and main.c, and remove them in the spec file
Updated package. Spec URL: http://lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/novacom-client.spec SRPM URL: http://lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/novacom-client-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc17.src.rpm
Ok, I don't know how that just got assigned to 0xFFFF, but reassigning to Package Review and Mohamed.
Here is the review: Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated ==== C/C++ ==== [x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: MUST Package contains no static executables. [x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [ ]: MUST Package is not relocatable. ==== Generic ==== [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5 [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5 [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: MUST Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5 [x]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [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 is included in %doc. [x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: MUST License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. rpmlint novacom-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc18.i686.rpm novacom.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US systemctl -> systemic 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. rpmlint novacom-client-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc18.src.rpm novacom-client.src: W: invalid-url Source0: novacom-git-ff7641193a.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. rpmlint novacom-client-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc18.i686.rpm novacom-client.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary novacom novacom-client.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary novaterm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. rpmlint novacom-client-debuginfo-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc18.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. >>> Can be safely ignored [x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Package has no sources or they are generated by developer [x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [x]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged. [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [ ]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. Note: Source0: novacom-git-%{_gitver}.tar.gz (novacom- git-%{_gitver}.tar.gz) Source1: novaterm (novaterm) Patch0: novacom- makefile-fixes.patch (novacom-makefile-fixes.patch) Patch1: novacom- remove-base64.patch (novacom-remove-base64.patch) >>> Not a blocker [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [x]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define. Issues: [!]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5 See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag [!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean [!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5 See: None [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. rpmlint novacom-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc18.i686.rpm novacom.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US systemctl -> systemic 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. rpmlint novacom-client-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc18.src.rpm novacom-client.src: W: invalid-url Source0: novacom-git-ff7641193a.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. rpmlint novacom-client-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc18.i686.rpm novacom-client.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary novacom novacom-client.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary novaterm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. rpmlint novacom-client-debuginfo-1.1.0-0.3.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc18.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint ---- Just one (last) comment: since the novacom package is a subpackage of the main one, you should add the %{release} condition on the Requires on novacom-client as below: Requires: novacom-client = %{version}-%{release} Anyway it's not a blocker; i trust you to fix it before importing the package. So this package is APPROVED.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: novacom-client Short Description: Utility to connect to WebOS devices Owners: jdieter Branches: f15 f16 f17 el5 el6 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
novacom-server-1.1.0-0.6.rc1.fc17,novacom-client-1.1.0-0.4.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/novacom-server-1.1.0-0.6.rc1.fc17,novacom-client-1.1.0-0.4.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc17
novacom-server-1.1.0-0.6.rc1.fc17, novacom-client-1.1.0-0.4.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.
novacom-server-1.1.0-0.6.rc1.fc17, novacom-client-1.1.0-0.4.rc1.git.ff7641193a.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.