[Bug 458408] New: Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458408

Summary: Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of
                    so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: [e-mail]
        ReportedBy: [e-mail]
         QAContact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail], [e-mail]
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
    Classification: Fedora

Spec URL: http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest.spec
SRPM URL:
http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest-20071216-1.fc9.src.rpm

Description:

vttest is a program to test the compatibility (or to demonstrate the
non-compatibility) of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals.

[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=458408

Jason Tibbitts  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|[e-mail]    |[e-mail]

--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts   2008-08-09 20:50:12 EDT ---
License seems to be MIT, not BSD.  It's just the "  Old Style with legal
disclaimer" from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/MIT with the MIT
references removed or replaced.

You probably don't want to use %{__mv} and %{__rm} in %prep but instead want
the non-macro versions to match the rest of your spec.

* source files match upstream:
   6c754405c1b9af2a28ba0975058ef8a38da230bc8c8e0874aebcbe2ff24dee7d  
   vttest.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named and is cleanly written
X macros not used consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
X license field should read "MIT".
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (none)
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   vttest = 20071216-1.fc10
   vttest(x86-64) = 20071216-1.fc10
  =

vttest-debuginfo-20071216-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm
   vttest-debuginfo = 20071216-1.fc10
   vttest-debuginfo(x86-64) = 20071216-1.fc10
  =

* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
  I ran this manually in the mock chroot and it seems to work fine.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* 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 -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=458408

--- Comment #2 from Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal   2008-08-10 05:11:22 EDT ---
Updated:

- License change to MIT
- Changed macro usage in %prep

Spec URL: http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest.spec
SRPM URL:
http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest-20071216-2.fc9.src.rpm

[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=458408

Miroslav Lichvar  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]
    Customer Facing|                            |---

--- Comment #3 from Miroslav Lichvar   2008-08-10 05:39:53 EDT ---
One detail, better source URL to use is
ftp://invisible-island.net/vttest/vttest-%{version}.tgz

so we won't have different versions saved in file with the same name.

[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=458408

--- Comment #4 from Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal   2008-08-10 18:45:25 EDT ---
Updated:

- Update source url

Spec URL: http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest.spec
SRPM URL:
http://sindrepb.fedorapeople.org/packages/vttest-20071216-3.fc9.src.rpm

[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=458408

--- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts   2008-08-17 11:01:22 EDT ---
Looks good to me now.

APPROVED

[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=458408

--- Comment #6 from Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal   2008-08-17 12:38:54 EDT ---
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: vttest
Short Description: Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible"
terminals
Owners: sindrepb
Branches: F-8 F-9 EL-4 EL-5
InitialCC:

[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=458408

--- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi   2008-08-23 14:01:19 EDT ---
cvs done.

[Bug 458408] Review Request: vttest - Test the compatibility of so-called "VT100-compatible" terminals

[Red Hat Bugzilla]

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=458408

Sindre Pedersen Bjørdal  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |NEXTRELEASE