On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
What do you think of the package?
Evaluation :
a) SPEC file contains redundant definitions
b) an incorrect "BuildRoot" is used
c) it has pointless buildrequires
d) RPM_BUILD_ROOT is used during %build
e) package is built without RPM_OPT_FLAGS
f) RPM_BUILD_ROOT is deleted during %install.
g) autotools files have to be regenerated because they are too old and errors happend during %configure
h) Group: Text tools does not exist, Productivity/Text/Utilities may be more adecuate.
i) potentially nasty compiler warnings : implicit declaration of function...
Well. it obviosuly does not comply with policies, I fixed all the mentioned problems. but you should try to test it better in the future ;-P
Thanks for the review, I know I make some of the same mistakes. It would be good if we could document a proper set of these on a wike page that could be referenced. I know I see a lot of packages on the BS with similar mistakes. I think it could be very useful to have a few packages documented in what would be a correct fashion. An example of good or proper methods for the various cagetories like languages, configure, devel, doc, libs... That way we could refer people to them to get ideas on how to fix their stuff. Maybe this is more a BS issue but I still think it would be good. -- Boyd Gerber <gerberb@zenez.com> ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org