Spec URL: http://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/ninja-ide.spec SRPM URL: http://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/ninja-ide-2.1.1-1.src.rpm Description: NINJA-IDE (from the recursive acronym: "Ninja-IDE Is Not Just Another IDE"), is a cross-platform integrated development environment (IDE). It's specially designed for Python Applications Development. Fedora Account System Username: comzeradd rpmlint ninja-ide-2.1.1-1.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Hi Nikos: Initial Comments: rpmlint -v ninja-ide* ninja-ide.noarch: I: checking ninja-ide.noarch: I: checking-url http://www.ninja-ide.org/ (timeout 10 seconds) ninja-ide.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ninja_ide/dependencies/pep8mod.py 0644L /usr/bin/env ninja-ide.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ninja-ide ninja-ide.src: I: checking ninja-ide.src: I: checking-url http://www.ninja-ide.org/ (timeout 10 seconds) ninja-ide.src: I: checking-url https://github.com/downloads/ninja-ide/ninja-ide/ninja-ide-v2.1.1.zip (timeout 10 seconds) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. - You could use BuildRequires: python2-devel http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires - Remove %defattr(-,root,root,-) is applicable only for EPEL5 the section %docs generally should be collocated after %files - Add %check section Require python-inotify for test (BuildRequires) Best Regards
Created attachment 623684 [details] Ninja IDE manpages Available in http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/precise/man1/ninja-ide.1.html
Release Tag: The initial value should normally be 1%{?dist}
Thanks for taking this I think I fixed all errors updated spec: http://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/ninja-ide.spec SRPM: http://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/ninja-ide-2.1.1-2.fc17.src.rpm
Hi Nikos There are still some issues: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/makerpm/ninja-ide/863983-ninja-ide/srpm/ninja-ide.spec 2012-10$ +++ /home/makerpm/ninja-ide/863983-ninja-ide/srpm-unpacked/ninja-ide.spec $ @@ -14,5 +14,5 @@ BuildRequires: python2-devel BuildRequires: python-setuptools -BuildRequires: python-inotify +#BuildRequires: python-inotify BuildRequires: PyQt4-devel Requires: PyQt4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In koji: warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ninja_ide/dependencies/pep8mod.py Best Regards
Sorry about. SRPM should be ok now. The warning about pep8mod.py I think it's inevitable, since I package the full ninja_ide path: %{python_sitelib}/ninja_ide/ and then use %attr to corrent wrong permissions in a specific file inside it: %attr(755,root,root) %{python_sitelib}/ninja_ide/dependencies/pep8mod.py
You can use in %install: find %{buildroot} -name 'pep8mod.py' | xargs chmod 0755 and remove %attr(755,root,root) %{python_sitelib}/ninja_ide/dependencies/pep8mod.py
Nice tip! Thanks updated files: spec: http://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/ninja-ide.spec SRPM: http://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc17.src.rpm
Koji Build Rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4580364 Koji Build F18 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4580373 Koji Build F17 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4580380 Koji Build F16 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4580387 rpmlint -v ninja-ide* ninja-ide.noarch: I: checking ninja-ide.noarch: I: checking-url http://www.ninja-ide.org/ (timeout 10 seconds) ninja-ide.src: I: checking ninja-ide.src: I: checking-url http://www.ninja-ide.org/ (timeout 10 seconds) ninja-ide.src: I: checking-url https://github.com/downloads/ninja-ide/ninja-ide/ninja-ide-v2.1.1.zip (timeout 10 seconds) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint -v ninja-ide.spec ninja-ide.spec: I: checking-url https://github.com/downloads/ninja-ide/ninja-ide/ninja-ide-v2.1.1.zip (timeout 10 seconds) 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Package Review ============== Key: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install if there is such a file. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [-]: Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [x]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "*No copyright* LGPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* GPL". 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/makerpm/863983-ninja-ide/licensecheck.txt The License is GPLv3 [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s) [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: CheckResultdir [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. Python: [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: 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]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [!]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. Note: Source0 (ninja-ide-v2.1.1.zip) [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc17.src.rpm ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc17.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint ninja-ide 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc17.noarch.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/env /usr/bin/python PyQt4 python(abi) = 2.7 python-inotify Provides -------- ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc17.noarch.rpm: ninja-ide = 2.1.1-3.fc17 MD5-sum check ------------- https://github.com/downloads/ninja-ide/ninja-ide/ninja-ide-v2.1.1.zip : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ab6ffc138647c98742dcfe3c97b1074325f31b67f6e5b0d6518a4fca3fd1721f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ab6ffc138647c98742dcfe3c97b1074325f31b67f6e5b0d6518a4fca3fd1721f ---------------- PACKAGE APPROVED ----------------
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: ninja-ide Short Description: Ninja IDE for Python development Owners: comzeradd echevemaster Branches: f16 f17 f18 InitialCC: echevemaster
Git done (by process-git-requests).
ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc18
ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc17
ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc16
ninja-ide-2.1.1-3.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository.
It seems that it needs python-setuptools as runtime dependency as well. I'm pushing a new update.
ninja-ide-2.1.1-4.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ninja-ide-2.1.1-4.fc18
ninja-ide-2.1.1-4.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ninja-ide-2.1.1-4.fc17
ninja-ide-2.1.1-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ninja-ide-2.1.1-4.fc16