https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3492 tuxor1337(a)web.de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |3491 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3492 Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.co | |m --- Comment #1 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann(a)gmail.com&gt; 2015-02-16 10:40:41 CET --- Some initial comments: BuildRequires: libmp3splt = 0.9.2, libmp3splt-devel = 0.9.2 Doesn't make sense. The libmp3splt library is pulled in by the according -devel package anyway. Can be safely dropped from BuildRequires. The license is GPLv2+ according to the licensecheck output: $ licensecheck -r * autogen.sh: *No copyright* UNKNOWN src/options_manager.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/options_checker.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/windows_utils.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/common.h: GPL (v2 or later) src/data_manager.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/windows_utils.h: GPL (v2 or later) src/data_manager.h: GPL (v2 or later) src/freedb.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/print_utils.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/options_parsers.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/freedb.h: GPL (v2 or later) src/options_parsers.h: GPL (v2 or later) src/utils.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/print_utils.h: GPL (v2 or later) src/utils.h: GPL (v2 or later) src/options_checker.h: GPL (v2 or later) src/mp3splt.c: GPL (v2 or later) src/options_manager.h: GPL (v2 or later) Add "BuildRequires: gettext", otherwise build will fail. The license file (COPYING) has to go in a separate directory apart from the docs: %license COPYING See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging... for more information. NEWS is missing from %doc. Moreover, the doc subdirectory contains a HTML version of the man page, should be worth also to be added to %doc. %{_datadir}/locale/*/LC_MESSAGES/%{name}.mo This is redundant, because you use the find_lang script anyway. %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz Don't use a certain extension for man pages. The compression algorithm can change in the future, better use a wildcard: %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.* %changelog * Mon Nov 17 2014 Thomas Vogt <admin(a)tovotu.de&gt; The changelog entries have to contain the version number and release tag: %changelog * Mon Nov 17 2014 Thomas Vogt <admin(a)tovotu.de&gt; - 2.6.2-1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3492 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sergio(a)serjux.com --- Comment #3 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; 2015-07-03 01:11:06 CEST --- SPEC: http://www.serjux.com/rpms/mp3splt.spec SRPM: http://www.serjux.com/rpms/mp3splt-2.6.2-1.fc21.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3492 MartinKG <mgansser(a)alice.de&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|3 |4 --- Comment #5 from MartinKG <mgansser(a)alice.de&gt; 2015-07-03 15:13:26 CEST --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/martin/rpmbuild/SPECS/mp3splt/licensecheck.txt [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: The spec file handles locales properly. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [-]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: %clean present but not required [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.10 starting (python version = 3.4.2)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled yum cache Start: cleaning yum metadata Finish: cleaning yum metadata INFO: enabled ccache Mock Version: 1.2.10 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.10 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/martin/rpmbuild/SPECS/mp3splt/results/mp3splt-2.6.2-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm /home/martin/rpmbuild/SPECS/mp3splt/results/mp3splt-debuginfo-2.6.2-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/yum-deprecated --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-21-x86_64/root/ --releasever 21 install /home/martin/rpmbuild/SPECS/mp3splt/results/mp3splt-2.6.2-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm /home/martin/rpmbuild/SPECS/mp3splt/results/mp3splt-debuginfo-2.6.2-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: mp3splt-2.6.2-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm mp3splt-2.6.2-1.fc21.src.rpm mp3splt.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) exctractor -> extractor, expectorate, tractor mp3splt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ogg -> egg, org, Gog mp3splt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filenames -> file names, file-names, filaments mp3splt.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) exctractor -> extractor, expectorate, tractor mp3splt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ogg -> egg, org, Gog mp3splt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filenames -> file names, file-names, filaments 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Requires -------- mp3splt (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libmp3splt.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- mp3splt: mp3splt mp3splt(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- http://download.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/mp3splt/mp3splt-2.6.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 3ec32b10ddd8bb11af987b8cd1c76382c48d265d0ffda53041d9aceb1f103baa CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3ec32b10ddd8bb11af987b8cd1c76382c48d265d0ffda53041d9aceb1f103baa Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -rn ../SRPMS/mp3splt-2.6.2-1.fc22.src.rpm -m fedora-21-x86_64-rpmfusion_free Buildroot used: fedora-21-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 Installation errors message can be ignored, because libmp3splt are not available on repo. Package APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3492 --- Comment #7 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; 2015-07-06 07:54:12 CEST --- Package CVS request ====================== Package Name: mp3splt Short Description: A Free, command-line, AlbumWrap and mp3wrap file exctractor Owners: sergiomb Branches: f21 InitialCC: ---------------------- License tag: free -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3492 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|33 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3492 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; 2016-07-21 04:48:59 CEST --- published in Rawhide and built in F24 and F23 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.