https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1086790
--- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt <[email protected]> --- The packaging looks sloppy and half-hearted. :-( The following does not cover all issues, since there are too many, but one needs to start somewhere: > Summary: The GnuDOS library for GNU/Linux > Group: Applications/Productivity > %description > GnuDOS is a library of functions [...] > [...] > GnuDOS is a group of utilities [...] The tools included in the library > [...] The Group tag for library base packages is "System Environment/Libraries". Either that, or omit the tag, since it's optional nowadays: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Group_tag > %files > %{_libdir}/* > %{_bindir}/* > %{_includedir}/console/* > %{_mandir}/man1/* > %{_infodir}/* > %{_docdir}/* Library and headers in a single package? That's not how it is done with Red Hat and Fedora distributions: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages > %{_includedir}/console/* $ repoquery --whatprovides /usr/include/console $ https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories > %{_infodir}/* https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Texinfo > $ rpmls -p gnudos-1.0-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm |grep ^d > drwxr-xr-x /usr/share/doc/fog > drwxr-xr-x /usr/share/doc/gnudos > drwxr-xr-x /usr/share/doc/mino > drwxr-xr-x /usr/share/doc/prime Not directly a blocker, but it's not nice of an RPM package called "gnudos" to occupy the doc homedirs "fog", "mino" and "prime" just because it includes executables with the same names. Typically, the package documentation is included below %_docdir/%name (i.e. %_pkgdocdir for F20 and newer). > $ rpmls -p gnudos-1.0-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm |grep lib > -rw-r--r-- /usr/lib64/libgnudos-1.0.a > -rwxr-xr-x /usr/lib64/libgnudos-1.0.la > lrwxrwxrwx /usr/lib64/libgnudos-1.0.so > lrwxrwxrwx /usr/lib64/libgnudos-1.0.so.1 > -rwxr-xr-x /usr/lib64/libgnudos-1.0.so.1.0.0 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries If you don't know the "fedora-review" tool yet, now would be a good opportunity to use it. Run "fedora-review -b 1086790" to point it at this review ticket. It evaluates the "SRPM URL:" and "Spec URL:" lines and performs many helpful checks. The tool also runs rpmlint on all packages, which you should have run before presenting this package for review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
