Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
Summary: Review Request: <main package name here> Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: bugzilla-sink@leemhuis.info ReportedBy: coldwell@redhat.com QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/coldwell/lsscsi.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/coldwell/lsscsi-0.17-2.src.rpm Description: Uses information provided by the sysfs pseudo file system in Linux kernel 2.6 series to list SCSI devices or all SCSI hosts. Includes a "classic" option to mimic the output of "cat /proc/scsi/scsi" that has been widely used prior to the lk 2.6 series.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
coldwell@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: <main |Review Request: lsscsi |package name here> |
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
cweyl@alumni.drew.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |cweyl@alumni.drew.edu
------- Additional Comments From cweyl@alumni.drew.edu 2006-07-14 21:53 EST ------- Are you sponsored into extras yet (as I'm not seeing you on the cvsextras page). If not, you should mark this bug as blocking FE-NEEDSPONSOR.
A couple thoughts on the spec, off the top of my head:
* The macros you have defined at the top are rather redundant, as you use them to then populate the Name:, Version:, Release: tags, all of which (when populated) define macros of the same names you're using containing the exact same information.
* You're using both, e.g., $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot}. Either or is fine, but the packaging guidelines require us to be consistent within a specfile (this is a "MUST").
* In build, why not use "%configure"? Similarly, in install, why not "%makeinstall"? Both of those macros should take care of passing the information you're doing manually. (Also, it would quiet rpmlint about "E: lsscsi configure-without-libdir-spec".)
* There may be comments on the test before "rm -rf ..." in %clean. I think it's ok, as it will always evaluate to true in the buildsys, but it could be nixed for brevity's sake.
That being said, I've built and installed this package on my system. Works nicely for me, even against my SATA drives.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From paul@city-fan.org 2006-07-15 09:41 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1)
- In build, why not use "%configure"? Similarly, in install, why not
"%makeinstall"?
%makeinstall is deprecated. See the "Macros" section of the Packaging Guidelines.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
- There may be comments on the test before "rm -rf ..." in %clean. I think it's
ok, as it will always evaluate to true in the buildsys, but it could be nixed for brevity's sake.
Not only that but the tests are completely redundant since a buildroot is explicitly specified in the spec file.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-17 09:46 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1)
Are you sponsored into extras yet (as I'm not seeing you on the cvsextras page). If not, you should mark this bug as blocking FE-NEEDSPONSOR.
A couple thoughts on the spec, off the top of my head:
- The macros you have defined at the top are rather redundant, as you use them
to then populate the Name:, Version:, Release: tags, all of which (when populated) define macros of the same names you're using containing the exact same information.
- You're using both, e.g., $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot}. Either or is fine,
but the packaging guidelines require us to be consistent within a specfile (this is a "MUST").
- In build, why not use "%configure"? Similarly, in install, why not
"%makeinstall"? Both of those macros should take care of passing the information you're doing manually. (Also, it would quiet rpmlint about "E: lsscsi configure-without-libdir-spec".)
- There may be comments on the test before "rm -rf ..." in %clean. I think it's
ok, as it will always evaluate to true in the buildsys, but it could be nixed for brevity's sake.
That being said, I've built and installed this package on my system. Works nicely for me, even against my SATA drives.
Good points, thanks. Just to clarify, the spec file comes from the project homepage; I just touched it up to silence some rpmlint complaints. However, it looks like it wasn't enough, so I'll incorporate your recommendations.
lsscsi is a very desirable addition since /proc/scsi/scsi runs out of memory if there are a large number of LUNs (>512, I think), and any kernel patch submitted to fix this problem is rejected (/proc/scsi/scsi is deprecated) and the submitter is referred to lsscsi:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=111287017419578&w=2
Chip
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-17 10:33 EST ------- I updated the spec file and src.rpm to incorporate your recommendations; they're still in the same place:
http://people.redhat.com/coldwell/lsscsi.spec http://people.redhat.com/coldwell/lsscsi-0.17-2.src.rpm
(don't know if I should have bumped the release number or not).
Chip
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
coldwell@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| |
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From cweyl@alumni.drew.edu 2006-07-20 02:30 EST ------- Spec file looks much cleaner, and builds in mock (5&devel/x86_64).
And yes, always bump the release number :)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink@leemhuis.info |tibbs@math.uh.edu OtherBugsDependingO|163776, 177841 |163779 nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2006-07-20 22:13 EST ------- Chip, I'll sponsor you, now that Chris has done all of the work.
rpmnlint has one complaint about the spec: W: lsscsi mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs cat -T shows this coming from spaces after the colons in Summary:, Name:, Version:, and Release:. Terribly minor, I know, but there's no reason not to fix it. (You only see this if you run rpmlint against the src.rpm.)
I guess it's pretty pointless for a package with one source file, but generally folks with multiprocessor machines appreciate it when you add %{?_smp_mflags} to your make line to build things in parallel. As long as it doesn't break the build, of course. (And if it does break the build, add a comment to indicate that fact.)
The only other thing is the oddity of including the author information at the end of %description. Then again, it would be somewhat uncouth to grab his specfile and then cut his name out of it, so I'm not sure what to do. I'll leave it up to you.
With only the space/tab thing to fix, I'll go ahead and approve this and you can fix it when you check in.
Review: * source files match upstream: c05c1cc6e6c425d86bf41e2ab0f09172 lsscsi-0.17.tgz * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * Compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). X rpmlint is silent (minor tabs/spaces thing) * debuginfo package looks complete. * final provides and requires are sane: lsscsi = 0.17-2 = libc.so.6()(64bit) * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. (Technically the documentation is larger then the executable, but we're talking about 25K total here.) * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app.
APPROVED
Go ahead and request cvsextras and fedorabugs access and I'll approve you. See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#GetAFedoraAccount for details.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-24 10:42 EST ------- OK, I replaced the tabs with spaces and added the SMP flags to the %make macro. The new spec/srpm are in the same place:
http://people.redhat.com/coldwell/lsscsi.spec http://people.redhat.com/coldwell/lsscsi-0.17-2.src.rpm
I also did the Fedora rigamarole -- username 'coldwell'.
Thanks,
Chip
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2006-07-24 11:27 EST ------- You should be all set up now; let me know if you have any trouble getting things imported and built.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-24 11:50 EST ------- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/NewPackageProcess
step 9 is failing; the owners CVS module doesn't seem to exist
CVSROOT is :gserver:cvs.devel.redhat.com:/cvs/dist
Chip
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta@iki.fi 2006-07-24 13:02 EST ------- That CVSROOT is wrong for FE. See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/UsingCvsFaq
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-25 11:05 EST ------- I was using CVS with the Fedora CVSROOT yesterday, but today I'm locked out:
$ export CVSROOT=:ext:USERNAME@cvs.fedora.redhat.com:/cvs/extras $ export CVS_RSH=ssh $ cvs co lsscsi For more information on using the Fedora source code repositories, please visit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs Permission denied (publickey,keyboard-interactive). cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages if any)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2006-07-25 11:12 EST ------- Dumb question, I know, but can I assume that you're not actually using "USERNAME" there?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-25 11:14 EST ------- (In reply to comment #12)
Dumb question, I know, but can I assume that you're not actually using "USERNAME" there?
Ooops. The hazards of copy/paste from the FAQ. Thanks.
Chip
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-25 11:16 EST ------- (In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #12)
Dumb question, I know, but can I assume that you're not actually using "USERNAME" there?
Ooops. The hazards of copy/paste from the FAQ. Thanks.
I take it back:
$ cvs co lsscsi For more information on using the Fedora source code repositories, please visit http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UsingCvs Permission denied (publickey,keyboard-interactive). cvs [checkout aborted]: end of file from server (consult above messages if any) $ set | grep CVS CVSROOT=:ext:coldwell@cvs.fedora.redhat.com:/cvs/extras CVS_RSH=ssh
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
------- Additional Comments From tibbs@math.uh.edu 2006-07-25 13:14 EST ------- I don't know, honestly. Perhaps the public key on that machine doesn't match what you sent?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
coldwell@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-26 10:53 EST ------- Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 10:55:06 -0400 (EDT) From: buildsys@fedoraproject.org To: coldwell@redhat.com Subject: Build Result: 13160 - lsscsi on fedora-development-extras
13160 (lsscsi): Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded. Build logs may be found at http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/13160-lsscs i-0.17-2/
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
coldwell@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |RAWHIDE
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-26 13:48 EST ------- http://brewweb.devel.redhat.com/brew/taskinfo?taskID=135258
emacs-21.4-15 built.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
coldwell@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|RAWHIDE |NEXTRELEASE
------- Additional Comments From coldwell@redhat.com 2006-07-26 13:49 EST ------- Ooops, wrong bug.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
coldwell@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |194453 nThis| |
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: lsscsi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora Version|devel |rawhide
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
Dan Horák dan@danny.cz changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dan@danny.cz Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #19 from Dan Horák dan@danny.cz 2009-11-25 14:55:19 EDT --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: lsscsi New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 Owners: sharkcz
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=198928
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #20 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2009-11-27 00:57:34 EDT --- cvs done.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org