[Bug 226337] Merge Review: pyparted

Mon Apr 23 22:10:10 UTC 2007

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Merge Review: pyparted

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226337

wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEEDINFO
               Flag|                            |needinfo?(dcantrell at redhat.c
                   |                            |om)

------- Additional Comments From wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro  2007-04-23 18:10 EST -------
==============

Key:
 - = N/A
 x = Check
 ! = Problem
 ? = Not evaluated

=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
 [x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
 [!] Rpmlint output:
Source RPM:
E: pyparted no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
pyparted-debuginfo &  pyparted: no output
 [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
 [x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec.
 [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
 [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meet other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
 [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     License type:GPL
 [x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
 [x] Spec file is written in American English. See also note 2&3 below
 [x] Spec file for the package is legible.
 [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
     SHA1SUM of package: f431a4e84a7a5671c1ed653c99d25a89c9acbf8d
pyparted-1.8.6.tar.bz2
 [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
     Tested on:devel/x86_64
 [x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch, OR:
     Arches excluded: -
     Why: -
 [!] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. See below issue #3
 [-] The spec file handles locales properly.
 [-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
 [x] Package is not relocatable.
 [x] Package must own all directories that it creates.                         

 [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
 [x] Permissions on files are set properly.
 [x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
 [x] Package consistently uses macros.
 [x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
 [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
 [-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
 [-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [!] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present. See below under issue #3
 [x] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
 [-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
 [x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
 [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
 [x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.

=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
 [x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
 [-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
 [x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
     Tested on: devel, x86_64 and i386
 [x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
     Tested on: devel, x86_64 and i386
 [x] Package functions as described.
 [-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
 [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
 [x] File based requires are sane.
 [x] Latest version is packaged.

=== Issues ===
1. Please add back the "rm -fR buildroot" line in %install, looks like it was
deleted by accident when editing the make line
2. The description tag says "it is used for manipulation partition tables". I am
not a native English speaker, but to me it looks like a cat has eaten a word. I
suggest "[...] used for manipulation of partition tables" or "[...] used for
manipulating partition tables"
3. The Summary field says "python module for..." while the Desc field starts
with "python modules for". How about sticking with either singular (module) or
plural (modules) ?
4. The makefile mentions the need of pkg-config since version 1.8.3. However
there is no .pc file and the spurious call to pkg-config (via LDFLAGS) leads to
an error message in the build log. I suggest either using the already existing
Makefile patch to remove the call to pkg-config or requiring pkg-config if the
.pc will come back.

-- 
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.