[Bug 182173] Review Request: eterm - a color vt102 terminal emulator
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Oct 2 03:22:13 UTC 2006
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: eterm - a color vt102 terminal emulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182173
ed at eh3.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO| |163779
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From ed at eh3.com 2006-10-01 23:22 EST -------
Hi Terje, the license issue does appear to be cleaned up. The
no-money one is gone but the LGPL-ed bits remain. I'm no lawyer
but it seems OK to link together the LGPL-ed parts with BSD code.
There are some suspicious bits such as:
1) literally hundreds of "pointer targets ... differ in signedness"
warnings which are worrisome but perhaps ignorable
2) there appear to be some missing BuildRequires and/or some missing
functionality such as:
checking for Etwin support...
checking for Tw_Open in -lTw... no
configure: WARNING: *** Twin support has been
disabled because libTw was not found ***
and I think libXmu-devel needs to be a BR since I don't see how it
gets pulled in by any of the other BRs. Please take a look.
In any case, the remaining review items are:
+ source matches upstream
+ license now appears to be OK and is correctly included
+ builds on FC5 i386
+ rpmlint reports no errors or warnings
+ package and spec naming OK
+ spec is legible
+ builds on FC5 i386
+ no locales
+ shared libs OK
+ not relocatable
+ dir ownership looks good
+ no file dupes
+ permissions OK
+ has %clean
+ consistent use of macros
+ code not content (although there are a number of background
pixmaps that could be split off into a separate package if
one desires)
+ docs are small and not needed for execution
+ no static, *.la, or devel libs
+ no headers or pkgconfig
+ has desktop file with desktop-file-install which appears sane
It'll be easy enough to sort out the BuildRequires with mock as soon
as libast is in Extras so we can leave that for later.
And I don't see any remaining blockers so its APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the package-review
mailing list