[Bug 480538] Review Request: iptux -- a tool for sharing and transporting files and directories in Lan
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Jan 18 20:59:54 UTC 2009
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=480538
Simon Wesp <cassmodiah at fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks| |177841
AssignedTo|jochen at herr-schmitt.de |nobody at fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #2 from Simon Wesp <cassmodiah at fedoraproject.org> 2009-01-18 15:59:53 EDT ---
I just took a short look at your package.. just a very short look
RPMLINT-ERRORS
--------------
1)
- iptux.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot A software for sharing in LAN.
remove the .
2)
- iptux.src: E: description-line-too-long A software for sharing and
transporting files and directories in LAN. It is written by C++ and the skin is
designed by gtk. Iptux is based on ipmsg, so you can use it send files to a
Windows PC which has an ipmsg Windows edition in Lan.
split it in more and shorter lines
3)
- iptux.src: W: non-standard-group Application/Network
take a look at /usr/share/doc/rpm-4.6.0/GROUPS
Applications/Internet
4)
- iptux.src: W: invalid-license GNU General Public License v2
take a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
GPLv2
5)
- iptux.i386: E: explicit-lib-dependency glib
you don't need glib in Requires
6)
- iptux.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog -0.4.4-3 ['0.4.4-3.fc10',
'0.4.4-3']
you packed the source! don't do this. use the source that upstream given.
7)
- iptux.i386: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/zh_CN/LC_MESSAGES/iptux.mo
%files -f %{name}.lang
Things in the specfile
----------------------
a)
you: Source0: iptux-0.4.4-3.tar.gz
should: Source0: http://iptux.googlecode.com/files/iptux-0.4.4.tar.gz
better: Source0:
http://iptux.googlecode.com/files/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
b)
%doc INSTALL NEWS README TODO AUTHORS
- don't use INSTALL for %doc, because users are not interessted in a howto of
installation. this is a package and the installation was done by you.
- add the COPYING file to %doc, because License file are very
- NEWS looks like "this is just a chinese header"-file. if news don't show
news, just an header you should remove it
- Same for README
c)
you %{_prefix}/bin/iptux
very better: %{bindir}/%{name}
d)
you: %{_datadir}/applications/*
better: %{_datadir}/applications/iptux.*
or: %{_datadir}/applications/iptux.desktop
e)
you: %{_datadir}/locale/*
add %files -f %{name}.lang and remove this completely
f)
you:
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/*
better:
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/%{name}/
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/ip-tux.png
%{_datadir}/pixmaps/ip-penguin.png
to d/e/f
please create an ownage of the files YOU packaged. not of all in the directory,
because you will take ownage of files you haven't created. files of other
packages.
g)desktop file install
--rebuild-mime-info-cache
Why? ip-tux doesn't need to mime a
h) desktop file install
--delete-original
Why are you deleting the desktop file to reinstall it again.
You should validate the desktopfile
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage
i)
Add the desktop-file-utils to BuildRequires
j)
BuildRequires: glib-devel, GConf2, gtk2-devel
Requires: glib, gtk2, GConf2, gtk2
rpm can create Requires from the BuildRequires.
Example: If you say BuildRequires: gtk2-devel rpm will automaticly create
Requires: gtk2
gtk2 is doubled...
k)
%post
update-desktop-database %{_datadir}/applications &>/dev/null || :
%postun
update-desktop-database %{_datadir}/applications &>/dev/null || :
you don't need this. why are you adding these commands?
l)
you should think about better texts for the changelog and use the right
version-number.
I will remove me from Asignee and add me to CC because you are sponsored and
you need a sponsor.
I will add the "need sponor bug"
I can not sponsor you
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list