https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2037 Ismael Olea <ismael(a)olea.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2 -- 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=2037 --- Comment #2 from Ismael Olea <ismael(a)olea.org&gt; 2011-11-20 20:32:54 CET --- (In reply to comment #1) to be honest, I didn't think about that O:-) -- 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=2037 --- Comment #4 from Ismael Olea <ismael(a)olea.org&gt; 2012-01-02 16:28:44 CET --- Sorry, I mean v0.5, which is here: http://olea.org/paquetes-rpm/fedora-16/acoustid-fingerprinter-0.5-1.fc16.... http://olea.orgtmp/acoustid-fingerprinter.spec -- 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=2037 --- Comment #6 from Andrea Musuruane <musuruan(a)gmail.com&gt; 2012-01-03 19:51:38 CET --- Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated === REQUIRED ITEMS === [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [1] [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x] Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [!] Spec uses macros instead of hard-coded directory names. [!] Package consistently uses macros. [-] Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x] PreReq is not used. [-] Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [2] [!] Fedora does not require the presence of the BuildRoot tag. [!] Fedora does not require to run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) and the beginning of %install. [-] Package use %makeinstall only when ``make install DESTDIR=...'' doesn't work. [x] The %clean section is not required. [-] The spec file handles locales properly. [x] Changelog in prescribed format. [x] Rpmlint output is silent. [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [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 %doc. [-] License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [3,4] [!] Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. MD5SUM this package : 0f9783093f43f0e7f6b2c86edfce03e0 MD5SUM upstream package : 0f9783093f43f0e7f6b2c86edfce03e0 [!] Compiler flags are appropriate. [!] %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x] Package must own all directories that it creates. [!] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [!] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x] Permissions on files are set properly. [!] It is no longer necessary to explicitly include a %defattr section at the beginning of each %files section. [x] No %config files under /usr. [-] %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [!] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install file if it is a GUI application. [5] [!] Package contains a valid .desktop file. [!] Package contains code, or permissible content. [-] Package contains a systemd init script if in need of one. [x] File names are valid UTF-8. [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [!] Package contains no bundled libraries. [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present. [x] Package contains no static executables. [-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present. [-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la). [x] Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x] Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x] Package does not generate any conflict. [x] Package does not contains kernel modules. [x] Package is not relocatable. [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Tested under F16/x86_64 [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x] Package installs properly. [x] Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [!] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [6] === SUGGESTED ITEMS === [!] Package functions as described. [x] Latest version is packaged. [x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-] 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] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x] SourceX is a working URL. [x] SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. [x] Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [-] %check is present and all tests pass. [-] Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Tested on fedora-rawhide-x86_64-rpmfusion_free [?] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x] Dist tag is present. [-] Spec use %global instead of %define. [!] Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x] No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x] Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [-] File based requires are sane. [!] Man pages included for all executables. [x] Uses parallel make. [-] Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. === Issues === 1. Package doesn't consistently use macros: %{_bindir}/acoustid-fingerprinter Should be: %{_bindir}/%{name} 2. Buildroot, rm -rf %{buildroot} in %install, are not needed unless you want to build for EL5: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag 3. This package is not permitted in Fedora because it links with ffmpeg. Anyway this is fine for RPM Fusion. 4. %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor is owned by "hicolor-icon-theme". You must not own it too. Update your %files section with: %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/%{name}.png 5. You must have a 'Requires: hicolor-icon-theme', which owns the %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor directory. 6. %defattr in %files are not needed: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions 7. Why are you using an external desktop instead of the one provided upstream included in the tarball? They are identical. Moreover, the desktop file included in the tarball is already installed by "make install". Therefore, use desktop-icon-validate to validate this file: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_... Verifying the desktop file will show the following warning: key "Encoding" in group "Desktop Entry" is deprecated You can get rid of the Enconding key using desktop-file-install in the following way: desktop-file-install \ --delete-original \ --remove-key Encoding \ --dir %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications \ %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop 8. If an application installs icons into one of the subdirectories in %{_datadir}/icons/ (such as hicolor), icon caches must be updated so that the installed icons show up in menus right after package installation: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache Your scriptlet is not the one provided in the wiki page. It misses the %posttrans section 9. Man pages is missing (this is a should item). 10. Icons could be installed with a for loop (really NOT mandatory at all but the spec file would be more readable though): for i in 16 24 32 48 128 256; do install -d -m 755 %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/${i}x${i}/apps install -m 644 images/acoustid-fp-${i}.png \ %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/${i}x${i}/apps/%{name}.png done 11. The spec file should not use an hard-coded directory name and it must not mix hard-coded and macro paths: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Macros Therefore: -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/ Should be: -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=%{_prefix} 12. Anyway -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr/ is useless. It's already the default, just strip it. 13. The sources contain two upstream ffmpeg header files in the /ffmpeg directory. Please patch the source to use system header files. $ find /usr/include/ffmpeg/ -name audioconvert.h /usr/include/ffmpeg/libavutil/audioconvert.h $ find /usr/include/ffmpeg/ -name samplefmt.h /usr/include/ffmpeg/libavutil/samplefmt.h 14. The package doesn't work properly on F-16+ (with qt 4.8). You cannot submit fingerprints. An upstream patch is here: https://github.com/lalinsky/acoustid-fingerprinter/commit/7577c13c02bcbf4... 15. %{optflags} are partly overwritten. On x86_64 I can see: "-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -O3" Please notice the -O3 at the end that overwrites the -O2 at the beginning. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main [5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files [6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines -- 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=2037 --- Comment #8 from Andrea Musuruane <musuruan(a)gmail.com&gt; 2012-01-04 14:21:21 CET --- (In reply to comment #7) I get error 404 trying to download the SRPM . The SPEC file is still 0.5-1. -- 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.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2037 --- Comment #10 from Andrea Musuruane <musuruan(a)gmail.com&gt; 2012-01-04 15:41:57 CET --- (In reply to comment #7) The Buildroot is still present: BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) This is fine for me - altough Fedora Guidelines suggest to stay more close to upstream. Please consider submitting the SVG icon upstream. Packages must own all directories they put files in, except for: * any directories owned by the filesystem, man, or other explicitly created -filesystem packages * any directories owned by other packages in your package's natural dependency chain https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ow... The %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor directory is owned by hicolor-icon-theme so you must require it. When I tried yesterday I had no problem. What Fedora version/arch are you running? Moreover (and I missed this yesterday) cmake should be called in %build not in %prep. Header files commonly contain forward declarations of classes, subroutines, variables, and other identifiers. These are contained in the library you are linking to. If you use a strongly modified version (different from upstream) compatibility problems could arise. Patch name is not compliant. It should start with the package name followed by a comment. E.g.: %{name}-fix-contenttypeheader.patch or %{name}-0.5-fix-contenttypeheader.patch. Moreover you should link to an upstream bug: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_ha... The upstream bug is the following: https://github.com/lalinsky/acoustid-fingerprinter/issues/3 Overriding these flags for performance optimizations (for instance, -O3 instead of -O2) is generally discouraged: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags Therefore, please patch the sources to get rid of "-O3". 16. This is not required (only build-required): Requires: desktop-file-utils Why did you add it? 17. You edited the changelog entry for 0.5-1 adding "- svg desktop icon". This is not true (there was no svg icon then) and you should not change previous entries. -- 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.