Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717750
Summary: Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit Viewer Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: yannick.brosseau@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: ---
Spec URL: http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/SPECS/lttv.spec SRPM URL: http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/SRPMS/lttv-0.12.38-1.src.rpm Description: LTTV is a modular trace viewer. It can perform analysis on traces of a Linux kernel instrumented with LTTng and UST.
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=717750
Yannick Brosseau yannick.brosseau@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
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=717750
--- Comment #1 from Yannick Brosseau yannick.brosseau@gmail.com 2011-06-29 16:51:05 EDT --- New srpm: http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/SRPMS/lttv-0.12.38-1.fc15.src...
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=717750
Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |martin.gieseking@uos.de
--- Comment #2 from Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de 2011-08-09 15:02:11 EDT --- Hi Yannik,
here are a few quick notes on your spec:
- use %global rather than %define, also see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_...
- in order to increase legibility, please indent (line up) the text of the header fields (Summary, Name, Version, etc.)
- also list all BuildRequires separately
- You can drop the BuildRoot field. It's still required for EPEL < 6, though. If you want to build the package for the old EPEL distros, you have to add a %clean section and rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT at the beginning of %install. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Distribution_specif...
- Replace LGPL v2.1 with LGPLv2, and GPL v2 with GPLv2. See here for a list of valid license abbreviations: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main
- devel packages must require the corresponding base/lib package with a fully versioned dependency: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
- add a non-empty %description to the devel package
- The %description lines must not exceed 80 chars per line. Just split them appropriately.
- Drop RPM_OPT_FLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -fstack-protector-all" from the make statement as it has no effect.
- as the base package seems to provide a GUI application, you must provide a .desktop file and install it properly: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Desktop_files
- replace %defattr(-,root,root) with %defattr(-,root,root,-) or remove it completely. It's still required if you plan to maintain the package for EPEL 4 as well.
- add AUTHORS, ChangeLog, COPYING, and README to the base package (with %doc).
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=717750
--- Comment #3 from Yannick Brosseau yannick.brosseau@gmail.com 2011-08-12 15:38:35 EDT --- Hi Martin,
Thanks for the feedback. I'm preparing an updated package based on your comments
Just one question.
- add a non-empty %description to the devel package
Do you mean to add a more detailed description to devel packages? Because all the package seem to have a description.
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=717750
--- Comment #4 from Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de 2011-08-12 16:03:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3)
- add a non-empty %description to the devel package
Do you mean to add a more detailed description to devel packages? Because all the package seem to have a description.
Yes, sorry. I was probably too tired and was fooled by my brain when I had a look at your package. The description texts are fine. Just ignore that comment. ;)
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=717750
--- Comment #5 from Yannick Brosseau yannick.brosseau@gmail.com 2011-09-01 14:57:59 EDT --- New SRPMS and SPEC available following Martin comments
http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/SRPMS/lttv-0.12.38-2.fc15.src... http://www.dorsal.polymtl.ca/~ybrosseau/fedora/SPECS/lttv.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=717750
Michael Schwendt mschwendt@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |mschwendt@gmail.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mschwendt@gmail.com
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=717750
Michael Schwendt mschwendt@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW CC|mschwendt@gmail.com | Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | AssignedTo|mschwendt@gmail.com |nobody@fedoraproject.org
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717750
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(yannick.brosseau@ | |gmail.com)
--- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu --- I am triaging old review tickets. I can't promise a review if you reply, but by closing out the stale tickets we can devote extra attention to the ones which aren't stale.
Package fails to build for me. Here is a scratch build in rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5318819
A build in f18 fails for me in the same manner.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717750
Yannick Brosseau yannick.brosseau@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(yannick.brosseau@ | |gmail.com) |
--- Comment #7 from Yannick Brosseau yannick.brosseau@gmail.com --- This old version is not supported anymore upstream. A completely reworked version is being worked on.
Is it best to close this one and recreate a new one when a new version is available upstream (probably in a few months) ?
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717750
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Last Closed| |2013-04-30 17:37:58
--- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu --- No point in having a ticket open when there's nothing to review, so I'll go ahead and close this.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717750
Christopher Meng cickumqt@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |cickumqt@gmail.com Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #9 from Christopher Meng cickumqt@gmail.com ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1024127 ***
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla