[Bug 871605] Review Request: fedup-dracut - the Fedora Upgrade tool

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871605

Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|fedora-review?              |
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> ---
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name. 
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. 
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. 
OK - License (GPLv2+)
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
No checksum, but diff of sources from upstream checkout matches. 

OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. 
OK - Package has a correct %clean section. 
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content. 
OK - Doc subpackage needed/used. 
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. 
OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install

OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. 
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. 
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. 
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. 
OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions)
See below - No rpmlint output. 
OK - final provides and requires are sane.

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock. 
OK - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or
/usr/sbin

Issues: 

1. URL looks wrong?
URL:        http://github.com/wgwoods/fedup
should be fedup-dracut ?

2. Non blocker, some warnings in compile: 
system-upgrade-fedora.c: In function 'rpm_trans_callback':
system-upgrade-fedora.c:493:9: warning: format '%u' expects argument of type
'unsigned int', but argument 6 has type 'rpm_loff_t' [-Wformat]
system-upgrade-fedora.c:494:9: warning: format '%u' expects argument of type
'unsigned int', but argument 7 has type 'rpm_loff_t' [-Wformat]

3. rpmlint says: 

fedup-dracut.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) initramfs -> ministrants
fedup-dracut.i686: W: summary-not-capitalized C initramfs environment for
system upgrades
fedup-dracut.i686: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
fedup-dracut.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) initramfs -> ministrants
fedup-dracut.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C initramfs environment for system
upgrades
fedup-dracut.src:1: E: hardcoded-library-path in
%{_prefix}/lib/dracut/modules.d
fedup-dracut.src: W: invalid-url Source0: fedup-dracut-0.7.tar.xz
fedup-dracut-plymouth.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C plymouth theme for
system upgrade progress
fedup-dracut-plymouth.noarch: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 8 warnings.

All can be ignored, except the Source0 would be good to document or provide a
direct 
download link. 

If you could fix the URL and the Source0 url before importing that would be
great. 

This package is APPROVED.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.