Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=605290

Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |metherid@gmail.com Alias| |transmageddon

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=605290

Parag AN(पराग) panemade@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=605290

--- Comment #4 from Runa Bhattacharjee runab@redhat.com 2010-08-11 08:59:01 EDT --- Hello,

I rewrote the .spec file and generated a new SRPM:

http://runab.fedorapeople.org/packages/transmageddon/0.16-2/

rpmlint output:

transmageddon.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transcendent transmageddon.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transcendent 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

A patch had to be written for the .desktop file, to fix the issues related to the deprecated key values. The patch and the traceback errors have been reported upstream: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=626626

Thanks Runa

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=605290

Mario Santagiuliana fedora@marionline.it changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora@marionline.it

--- Comment #6 from Mario Santagiuliana fedora@marionline.it 2012-01-12 08:12:16 EST --- I am still learning how to became a reviewer so I just give you an unofficial review.

Package Review ==============

Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated

==== 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 architecture. [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: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine [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 would be needed if support for EPEL is required [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files -f %{name}.lang section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: MUST Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using desktop- file-install file if it is a GUI application. [?]: 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 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 would be needed if support for EPEL5 is 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. [!]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: MUST The spec file handles locales properly. [?]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [?]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict. [?]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [?]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [?]: MUST Package installs properly. [-]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.

rpmlint transmageddon-0.16-2.fc17.noarch.rpm

transmageddon.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transponder transmageddon.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transponder 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

rpmlint transmageddon-0.16-2.fc17.src.rpm

transmageddon.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transponder transmageddon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transponder transmageddon.src:38: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:38: W: macro-in-comment %{_bindir} transmageddon.src:39: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:39: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:40: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:40: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:41: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:41: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:42: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:42: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:43: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:43: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %{name} transmageddon.src:45: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:45: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:45: W: macro-in-comment %{name} transmageddon.src:46: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:46: W: macro-in-comment %{_mandir} transmageddon.src:51: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 51) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 23 warnings.

[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. /home/makerpm/605290/transmageddon-0.16.tar.bz2 : MD5SUM this package : 11d530878d7fec48c1bdd3221a194464 MD5SUM upstream package : 11d530878d7fec48c1bdd3221a194464

[?]: 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. [-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [-]: 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. [!]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. I think you could use %{?dist} [?]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [?]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [?]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. Note: Patch0: desktop_entry.patch (desktop_entry.patch) [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [?]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [?]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.

Issues: [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files -f %{name}.lang section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed [!]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. The spec file inside tarball specify LGPLv2+ license, you specify GPLv2+, the license should be LGPLv2+. [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.

rpmlint transmageddon-0.16-2.fc17.noarch.rpm

transmageddon.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transponder transmageddon.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transponder 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

rpmlint transmageddon-0.16-2.fc17.src.rpm

transmageddon.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transponder transmageddon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US transcoder -> trans coder, trans-coder, transponder transmageddon.src:38: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:38: W: macro-in-comment %{_bindir} transmageddon.src:39: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:39: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:40: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:40: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:41: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:41: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:42: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:42: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:43: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:43: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %{name} transmageddon.src:45: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:45: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} transmageddon.src:45: W: macro-in-comment %{name} transmageddon.src:46: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} transmageddon.src:46: W: macro-in-comment %{_mandir} transmageddon.src:51: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 51) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 23 warnings.

[!]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. I think you could use %{?dist} [!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. Note: Patch0: desktop_entry.patch (desktop_entry.patch)

Generated by fedora-review 0.1.1

There is a new version of transmageddon 0.20, you could update your package :)

Thank you