https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1250833
--- Comment #6 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group) <[email protected]> --- Please fill in your full real name in your bugzilla account preferences. Consider pointing the fedora-review tool at this ticket: fedora-review -b 1250833 It downloads the latest spec file and src.rpm from the "Spec URL:" and "SRPM URL:" lines (or additional URLs it finds) and performs many checks that are relevant during review and should be most interesting to the package maintainer. > -> Requires: helm-common > you should specify version at least. Example: > Requires: helm-common = %{version} Omitting -%{release} serves no purpose. Actually, -common subpackages are disguised base packages, and this one applies except the %{?_isa}: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package > %doc %doc is not a section but an attribute. Empty %doc lines are no-op. It's more cleaner to delete them. > %package lv2 > Summary: Helm lv2 plugin > Group: Applications/Multimedia > Requires: %{name}-common = %{version} > %description lv2 > Helm is a polyphonic software synth with lots of modulation and and easy to > use UT The %description ought to explain what this particular package does. What's the relevance of LV2, for example? Why is the %description longer than the %description of the base package? > %description > Helm is a software synth designed to be easy to use The subpackage is missing an explicit dependency on "lv2". Note that since LV2 is a library-less API, there is no automatic dependency on it, but package "lv2" is the one that provides the ownership of %_libdir/lv2. > %files lv2 > %{_libdir}/lv2/helm.lv2/ > %package lv2 That creates a subpackage helm-lv2. Instead, I think the general add-on package naming guidelines apply: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28General.29 It is a plugin to LV2. It extends LV2. %package -n lv2-helm > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/4821/10784821/build.log Build output is non-verbose. One cannot see which compiler and linker flags have been used actually. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags -- 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
