Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: simfqt - C++ Simulated Fare Quote System Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732146
Summary: Review Request: simfqt - C++ Simulated Fare Quote System Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: 0xFFFF AssignedTo: dwmw2@infradead.org ReportedBy: denis.arnaud_fedora@m4x.org QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, dwmw2@infradead.org, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Depends on: 702987 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: ---
Spec URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/simfqt/simfqt-0.1.0-1.spec SRPM URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/simfqt/simfqt-0.1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: simfqt aims at providing a clean API and a simple implementation, as a C++ library, of a Travel-oriented fare engine. It corresponds to the simulated version of the real-world Fare Quote or pricing system.
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=732146
Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fedora@m4x.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|0xFFFF |Package Review AssignedTo|dwmw2@infradead.org |nobody@fedoraproject.org
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=732146
Volker Fröhlich volker27@gmx.at changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |volker27@gmx.at
--- Comment #1 from Volker Fröhlich volker27@gmx.at 2011-08-20 20:18:03 EDT --- Please see my comments on the airsched package!
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=732146
--- Comment #2 from Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fedora@m4x.org 2011-08-21 10:17:29 EDT --- (integrated the feedback from the AirSched package review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732205#c2) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Spec URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/simfqt/simfqt-0.1.1-1.spec SRPM URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/sim/simfqt/simfqt-0.1.1-1.fc15.src.rpm ---------------------------------------------------------------------
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=732146
Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |martin.gieseking@uos.de AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |martin.gieseking@uos.de Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de 2011-11-11 16:27:33 EST --- Hi Denis,
the package looks fine. Just remove the INSTALL file from the docs. It's added to the package because you install it with "make install" into %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}. Files in this directory are considered a part of the package docs, and are added even if not listed in %files. The easiest way to fix this is to insert rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/ after the mv statement in %install.
Please fix this before you check in the package.
$ rpmlint ./simfqt-*.rpm simfqt.x86_64: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/simfqt-0.1.1/INSTALL 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
--------------------------------- key:
[+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work ---------------------------------
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum simfqt-0.1.1.tar.bz2* 85c626f3d7c5183bc983eff3fc69c691 simfqt-0.1.1.tar.bz2 85c626f3d7c5183bc983eff3fc69c691 simfqt-0.1.1.tar.bz2.upstream
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [+] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [+] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [.] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [+] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then .so files without suffix must go in a -devel package. [+] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
EPEL <= 5 only: [+] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field. [+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}. [+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. [+] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [+] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [+] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.
---------------- Package APPROVED ----------------
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=732146
Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fedora@m4x.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fedora@m4x.org 2011-11-11 18:04:20 EST --- Thank you very much for that review, Martin!
I shall simply remove the INSTALL file from the source, i.e. upstream, as the build system is now based on CMake, and INSTALL is no longer relevant.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: simfqt Short Description: C++ Simulated Fare Quote System Library Owners: denisarnaud Branches: f14 f15 f16 el4 el5 el6 InitialCC: denisarnaud -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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=732146
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-11-11 20:20:53 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
Not accepting new f14 branches. Also, --------------------, etc, not a valid FAS account.
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=732146
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
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=732146
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-13 04:12:32 EST --- simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc16
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=732146
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-13 04:13:13 EST --- simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc15
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=732146
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-13 04:14:03 EST --- simfqt-0.1.2-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/simfqt-0.1.2-1.el6
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=732146
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-13 19:51:38 EST --- simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.
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=732146
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc15 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2011-11-24 20:52:02
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-24 20:52:02 EST --- simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.
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=732146
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc15 |simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc16
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-24 21:08:06 EST --- simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
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=732146
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|simfqt-0.1.2-1.fc16 |simfqt-0.1.2-1.el6
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-29 14:02:42 EST --- simfqt-0.1.2-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
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=732146
Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fedora@m4x.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |760594
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla