[Bug 711181] New: Review Request: mono-reflection - Helper library for Mono Reflection support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: mono-reflection - Helper library for Mono Reflection support
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711181
Summary: Review Request: mono-reflection - Helper library for Mono Reflection support Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: tcallawa@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: ---
Spec URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/mono-reflection.spec SRPM URL: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/mono-reflection-0.1-0.1.20... Koji Scratch Build (dist-f15): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3113768 Description: Helper library for Mono Reflection support.
Packager Note: This is a necessary dependency for the latest db4o package update.
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=711181
Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |chkr@plauener.de AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |chkr@plauener.de Flag| |fedora-review?
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=711181
--- Comment #1 from Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de 2011-06-07 18:13:03 EDT --- Here is the full review of the package:
* rpmlint: OK rpmlint RPMS/i686/mono-reflection-* SRPMS/mono-reflection-0.1-0.1.201105123git04d1df.fc15.src.rpm SPECS/mono-reflection.spec mono-reflection.i686: E: no-binary mono-reflection.i686: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
-> false positives (mono assemblies are supposed to be in %{_libdir} and they are not recognized as (ELF) binaries)
mono-reflection-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
-> OK, package does not ship any further API documentation
mono-reflection.src: W: invalid-url Source0: mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df.tar.bz2 SPECS/mono-reflection.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df.tar.bz2
-> OK, source obtained via VCS
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
* naming: OK - spec file name matches package name - the upstream name is "mono.reflection" - however, according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Separators the separator for name parts should be "-" so the chosen name is OK
* sources: TODO - Source0 tag ok - spectool -g does not work, which is OK for VCS checkouts - I followed exactly the steps from the spec file to create the source tarball, but I get a source package with another md5sum: chkr: b68ba65fbc6ed8db9cf1feea31a1b694 mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df.tar.bz2 spot: 49c3f06edbdb02c5cb4454645824fc15 mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df.tar.bz2 - actually the sources itself match, but the .git directory doesn't which causes the different md5sums - however, there are two problems here: a) .git is packaged b) the steps to re-create the tarball are not referring to a specific revision For my packages I have usually added a small script which creates a "normal" tarball (without any VCS directories) from a specific revision/commit:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=banshee.git;a=blob;f=banshee-make-gi...
The comment in the spec file is then reduced to something like this: "# sh banshee-make-git-snapshot.sh <gitcommit> <gitdate>"
This will ensure that it is always possible to re-create exactly the same tarball.
* binaries in upstream sources: TODO - although it is not used during compilation, there is one pre-compiled C# assembly: mono-reflection-201105123git04d1df/Test/target.dll - just to be sure I would delete it in %prep
* License: OK - MIT is a Fedora approved License - License in spec file match the actual license (as mentioned in the source files) - Probably you could ask upstream to include a license file.
* spec file written in American English and legible: OK
* compilation: OK - builds fine in koji: F16/rawhide
* BuildRequires: OK
* Requires: TODO - the -devel package should use the fully versioned arch-specific dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
* bundled copies of system libraries: OK (n/a)
* locales handling: OK (n/a)
* ldconfig in %post and %postun: OK (n/a)
* package owns all directories that it creates: OK
* %files section: OK
* no files listed twice in %files: OK
* file permissions: OK
* macro usage: OK
* code vs. content: OK (no content)
* main package should not contain development related parts: OK
* large documentation into subpackage: OK (n/a)
* header files in -devel subpackage: OK (n/a)
* static libraries in -static package: OK (n/a)
* *.so link in -devel package: OK (n/a)
* devel package requires base package using fully versioned dependency: OK
* packages must not contain *.la files: OK (n/a)
* GUI applications must provide *.desktop file: OK (n/a)
* packages must not own files/dirs already owned by other packages: OK
* all filenames UTF-8: OK
* debuginfo sub-package: OK (n/a)
Summary of the open issues: - better (reproducible) creation of the tarball from git repository - deleting all pre-compiled binaries/assemblies in %prep - use of fully versioned dependency in Requires:
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=711181
--- Comment #2 from Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com 2011-06-13 13:16:41 EDT --- Thanks, all items addressed:
New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/mono-reflection-0.1-0.2.20... New SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/mono-reflection.spec
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=711181
Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de 2011-06-14 17:42:20 EDT --- Thanks for the new package, I have verified that all mentioned issues are fixed now -> 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=711181
Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com 2011-06-15 15:55:20 EDT --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: mono-reflection Short Description: Helper library for Mono Reflection support Owners: spot Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC:
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=711181
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-06-15 16:01:36 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
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=711181
Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed| |2011-08-08 15:38:52
--- Comment #6 from Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com 2011-08-08 15:38:52 EDT --- This guy is in F-15 and F-16. Closing.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla