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=214669
Summary: Review Request: logserial Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: wolfy@nobugconsulting.ro QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com
Spec URL: http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/rpms/logserial/logserial.spec SRPM URL: http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/rpms/logserial/logserial-0.4.2-1.src.rpm Description: Package for logging incoming bytes on asynchronous serial ports
Package for logging incoming bytes on asynchronous serial ports. It was written for loging calls on our telephone central, but you can use it for any devices connected to serial ports. From version 0.4 it can be used to send data through serial line.
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |kevin@tummy.com OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From kevin@tummy.com 2006-11-11 23:29 EST ------- OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (GPL) OK - License field in spec matches See below - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 833fff07602e4a21f447aa194d14ecd8 logserial-0.4.2.tar.gz 833fff07602e4a21f447aa194d14ecd8 logserial-0.4.2.tar.gz.1 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 - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
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 - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane:
SHOULD Items:
OK - Should build in mock. x86_64/i386 - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version
Issues:
1. Given how long since the last upstream release of this package it seems unlikely, but any chance of them including a COPYING file?
2. Instead of the flags you set in the logserial-makefile.patch perhaps you could set $RPM_OPT_FLAGS instead?
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
------- Additional Comments From wolfy@nobugconsulting.ro 2006-11-12 10:52 EST ------- Thank you for the review.
With respect to the first suggestion: I have written the developer and kindly asked him to include the proper license file in the next release. With the second one: done. On my test system the new src.rpm compiles sucessfully in mock. Please find the modified spec and src.rpm at http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/rpms/logserial/logserial.spec and http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/rpms/logserial/logserial-0.4.2-2.src.rpm
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
------- Additional Comments From kevin@tummy.com 2006-11-12 21:01 EST ------- ok. Issue 1 isn't a blocker, just nice to have.
Humm...on issue #2, I am not seeing the rpm opt flags being used... In my build.log I see:
+ make -j2 gcc -Wall -D_POSIX -D_SYSV -D_SELECT -D_HAVE_MACROS -c -o logserial.o logserial.c ...
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
------- Additional Comments From wolfy@nobugconsulting.ro 2006-11-13 08:26 EST ------- You are perfectly right, there was an error in the patch. Please retry the new versions, available as http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/rpms/logserial/logserial.spec and http://wdl.lug.ro/linux/rpms/logserial/logserial-0.4.2-3.src.rpm Building in mock on a i386 machine with arch=i686 and without any argument seemed OK. Unfortunately my x86_64 test machine is temporary out of function, so I could not test that, too.
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From kevin@tummy.com 2006-11-13 16:33 EST ------- Excellent. That version from comment #4 works fine.
The rpm-opt-flags are used. It builds find here on x86_64 and i386.
I don't see any further blockers, so this package is APPROVED.
Don't forget to close this request NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built.
Also consider reviewing another waiting package to help spread the reviewing load.
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
------- Additional Comments From wolfy@nobugconsulting.ro 2006-11-13 18:18 EST ------- Thank you, Kevin.
Sucessfully built in devel. Will close as soon as FC-5 and FC-6 are built, too.
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
wolfy@nobugconsulting.ro changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora
wolfy@nobugconsulting.ro changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
------- Additional Comments From wolfy@nobugconsulting.ro 2007-07-16 19:37 EST ------- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: logserial New Branches: EL-4 EL-5
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
------- Additional Comments From kevin@tummy.com 2007-07-16 21:37 EST ------- cvs done.
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: logserial
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=214669
bugzilla@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |rawhide
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org