[opensuse-buildservice] Re: Contrib: Packages Review: "banner" (Build Service wiki pages suggestions)
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
Le jeudi 28 août 2008, à 18:34 -0600, Boyd Lynn Gerber a écrit :
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.
If it's not in http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions then it should be added there. (reviewing packages is actually a good way to improve our package conventions) Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le jeudi 28 août 2008, à 18:34 -0600, Boyd Lynn Gerber a écrit :
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.
If it's not in http://en.opensuse.org/SUSE_Package_Conventions then it should be added there.
(reviewing packages is actually a good way to improve our package conventions)
+1, but reading that leaves me still needing a good example. I am a very
visual person and I do not always get the information correct in my mind.
I have to see it used properly to really understand. I have in my mind
pages. I see a paper with the words on it. Trying to get the url with
that into a page I sometimes have problems. But I think it would be good
to have samples to reference as a good check. But we really do need to
keep what documentation we have up to date.
We also need manuals for the BS. As in an other thread.
Thanks,
--
Boyd Gerber
participants (2)
-
Boyd Lynn Gerber -
Vincent Untz