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/show_bug.cgi?id=448458
Summary: Review Request: postal - mail server benchmark Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: russell@coker.com.au QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,notting@redhat.com
Spec URL: http://www.coker.com.au/rpm/postal.spec SRPM URL: http://www.coker.com.au/rpm/postal-0.70-2.src.rpm Description: The Postal suite consists of an SMTP delivery benchmark (postal), a POP retrieval benchmark (rabid) and a SMTP sink (bhm). It is designed to test mail servers and mail forwarding systems.
This is my first package and I need a sponsor.
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: postal - mail server benchmark
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448458
russell@coker.com.au changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| |
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: postal - mail server benchmark
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448458
------- Additional Comments From goyal.hemant@gmail.com 2008-06-06 13:40 EST ------- Hi Russell,
I am only performing a pre-review (not formal) of your packaging request. I am not entitled to sponsor you, however someone else will in due time.
1] There seems to be a version inconsistency. The hyperlink for the source version 0.70 leads to source version 0.69. Kindly check with upstream.
I have changed the version to 0.69 for further testing.
2] The RPM package fails to build due to a build error during compilation of the program (please take a look at the log file attached)
Instead of
--------------------------------------- %configure --prefix=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} --------------------------------------- It is preferable to use
-------------------------------------- %configure --disable-static --------------------------------------
3]Kindly avoid using hardcoded paths for %files section. Use macros as much as possible. They are defined here : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros
Example: /usr/sbin/rabid will become %{_sbindir}/rabid and so on
4] Kindly include the %dist tag with your release number as : Release: 2%{?dist} for your future releases.
Thanks
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: postal - mail server benchmark
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448458
------- Additional Comments From goyal.hemant@gmail.com 2008-06-06 13:40 EST ------- Created an attachment (id=308552) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=308552&action=view) Postal Build Fail LOG
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=448458
Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |itamar@ispbrasil.com.br Alias| |postal
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=448458
David Nalley david@gnsa.us changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |david@gnsa.us Flag| |needinfo?(russell@coker.com | |.au)
--- Comment #3 from David Nalley david@gnsa.us 2009-04-24 16:56:24 EDT --- This package review has been sitting idle for 10 months plus now.
My preference is that the original packager would pick this up and continue it, however failing that one week from now I'll mark this as a dead review and close the ticket, and likely work on getting it packaged and reviewed.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews#Submitter_...
Russell:
Please pick this review back up if you are interested in maintaining it within Fedora.
Thanks
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=448458
David Nalley david@gnsa.us changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Depends on| |201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution| |NOTABUG Flag|needinfo?(russell@coker.com | |.au) |
--- Comment #4 from David Nalley david@gnsa.us 2009-05-10 13:41:31 EDT --- It's been a couple weeks - and no response. I'll start working on repackaging this shortly.
Closing notabug and blocking FE-DEADREVIEW per: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews#Submitter_...
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=448458
Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jussi.lehtola@iki.fi Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi 2009-05-22 13:02:30 EDT ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 500082 ***
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=448458
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Depends on|201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) |
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org