[Bug 522979] Review Request: lua-lunit - Unit testing framework for Lua

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522979





--- Comment #1 from Tim Niemueller <tim at niemueller.de>  2009-09-21 17:47:22 EDT ---
MUST

* OK: rpmlint
# rpmlint lua-lunit.spec 
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
# rpmlint lua-lunit-0.4-1.fc11.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
# rpmlint lua-lunit-0.4-1.fc11.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

* OK: package name
* OK: package version and release
* OK: spec file name
* OP: package guideline-compliant
* OK: license complies with guidelines
* OK: license field accurate
* OK: license file not deleted
* OK: spec in US English
* OK: spec legible
* OK: source matches upstream
  sha256sum 09efe9f35132353c6810c57367cba29659afc7348ff593c529cbee1831d66d7a
* OK: builds under >= 1 archs, others excluded
* OK: dependencies (requires)
* FAIL: build dependencies complete
  lua >= %{luaver} should be in BR for %check to work. The lua package actually
is pulled in (cf. root.log from scratch build below), but this is only
intermediate, should be included directly as BR.
* N/A: locales handled using %find_lang, no %{_datadir}/locale
* N/A: library -> ldconfig
* N/A: relocatable: give reason
* N/A: own all directories
* OK: no dupes in %files
* OK: permission
* OK: %clean RPM_BUILD_ROOT
* FAIL: macros used consistently
  Most of the time you use %{dir} macros, but then you use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT,
  should be %{buildroot}
* OK: Package contains code
* N/A: large docs => -doc
* OK: doc not runtime dependent
* N/A: headers in -devel
* N/A: static in -static
* N/A: if contains *.pc, req pkgconfig
* N/A: if libfiles are suffixed, the non-suffixed goes to devel
* N/A: devel requires versioned base package
* N/A: desktop file uses desktop-file-install
* OK: clean buildroot before install
* OK: filenames UTF-8

SHOULD
* OK: if license text missing, ask upstream to include it
* N/A: desc and summary contain translations if available
* OK: package builds in mock on all architectures
  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1695926
* OK: package functions as described
# lunit /usr/share/doc/lua-lunit-0.4/example.lua 
Loaded testsuite with 4 tests in 2 testcases.

    F...

6 Assertions checked.

  1) Failure (simple.test_failure):
/usr/share/doc/lua-lunit-0.4/example.lua:13: true expected but was false
/usr/share/doc/lua-lunit-0.4/example.lua:13: This test always fails!

Testsuite finished (3 passed, 1 failed, 0 errors).

* OK: scriplets are sane
  If %check fails, you should cat testlog.txt such that the user knows what
  happened.
* N/A: other subpackages should require versioned base
* N/A: if main pkg is development-wise, pkgconfig can go in main package
* N/A: require package not files

Question:
Is the koji scratch build enough to assert "package builds in mock on all
architectures"?

Preventing approval:
- BR lua missing
- Inconsistent macro usage (I know that's debatable, but the guidelines state
that you should stick to one type or the other)

Both are only minor, but for the first review I must be pedantic, right ;-)

-- 
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.