[Bug 189157] Review Request: aspell-he

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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

Summary: Review Request: aspell-he


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189157


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |tibbs at math.uh.edu
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-04-23 01:56 EST -------
Some suggestions:

Add a comment explaining why the package can't be noarch.  (I'm assuming the
dictionary files are endian or word-length dependent, although the files are
exactly the same on i386 and x86_64.)  It would be nice to have some definitive
statement on the matter from the aspell authors; I looked through their
documentation but didn't see anything, and I have no PPC machine to test with.

Remove commented items in the specfile, like the Epoch: line or the last line of
%files.

Consider using a here document instead of a bunch of echo statements in %build.
 Personal taste; I think it just looks cleaner but it's up to you.

Issues:
rpmlint complains:
E: aspell-he no-binary
E: aspell-he only-non-binary-in-usr-lib

If we assume that endianness issues prevent the package form being noarch, both
of these are indeed pointless.  The package isn't supposed to have a binary and
it's not possible to put things in /usr/share because the data is not
system-independent.

* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written, uses macros consistently and
conforms to the Perl template.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible and is included as %doc.
* source files match upstream:
   f453989e1df364af9479e893c16ac9d8  aspell6-he-0.9-0.tar.bz2
   f453989e1df364af9479e893c16ac9d8  aspell6-he-0.9-0.tar.bz2-srpm
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (development, i386 and x86_64).
O rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane.
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
* creates no non-doc directories.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* no %check present; no test suite upstream.
* content only, but clearly permissible.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.