[Bug 225847] Merge Review: gnupg

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: gnupg


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225847


tmz at pobox.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |nalin at redhat.com
                 CC|                            |tmz at pobox.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




------- Additional Comments From tmz at pobox.com  2007-02-03 10:32 EST -------
Hi Nalin.  Here's a review for gnupg.

MUST items verified

* Adheres to naming guidelines
* Specfile name matches package name
* Meets packaging guidelines (see below for comment on %{_libexecdir} usage
* License meets open-source requirements
* License included in %doc
* License field matches the upstream license
* Specfile is in American English
* Specfile is legible
* Source matches upstream (sha1: 9cbbef5c94f793867ff3ae4941816962311a0563)
* Builds, installs, and works (tested on FC6, i386)
* Owns directories that it creates
* Does not own files or directories of other packages
* File list has no duplicates
* File perms are sane
* Specfile includes %clean section
* Macros used consistently
* Package contains code or permissible content


SHOULD items verified

* Builds in mock against fedora-{5,6}-i386-core targets
* Package functions correctly (tested on FC6, i386)


NEEDSWORK items

* rpmlint produces several warnings and errors on the srpm

$ rpmlint gnupg-1.4.6-3.src.rpm
W: gnupg summary-ended-with-dot A GNU utility for secure communication and data
storage.
E: gnupg tag-not-utf8 %changelog
E: gnupg non-utf8-spec-file gnupg.spec
W: gnupg buildprereq-use autoconf, automake, bzip2-devel, expect, ncurses-devel
W: gnupg buildprereq-use openldap-devel, readline-devel, zlib-devel, gettext-devel
W: gnupg buildprereq-use curl-devel
W: gnupg buildprereq-use libusb-devel
W: gnupg unversioned-explicit-provides gpg
W: gnupg unversioned-explicit-provides openpgp
W: gnupg prereq-use /sbin/install-info
W: gnupg make-check-outside-check-section make check
E: gnupg use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR
W: gnupg mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 73, tab: line 50)

All except the unversioned-explicit-provides on the virtual gpg and openpgp
packages should be corrected.

The binary rpm produces one warning:

$ rpmlint gnupg-1.4.6-4.fc6-results/gnupg-1.4.6-4.fc6.i386.rpm 
W: gnupg file-not-utf8 /usr/share/man/man1/gpg.ru.1.gz

I don't know Russian so I couldn't verify if iconv would properly converted the
man page so I left it alone.

* Scriplets are sane

The scriptlets to install info pages could be simplified somewhat and made more
consistent with the examples in Packaging/ScriptletSnippets


Comments/Questions/Notes

There are a number of unneeded configure flags to enable zlib, bzip, readline,
and curl.  These are all enabled by default in the current gnupg so they can be
removed.

Why is %{_libdir} used for %{_libexecdir}?  Packaging/Guidelines allow the use
of this dir and it is what upstream does by default.  %{_libdir}/gnupg is used
for extensions, though none are currently shipped with this package (or by any
others in Fedora AFAIK).

The CFLAGS are set explicitly to prevent the binaries from having text
relocations, as per BZ#145836 (in case anyone wonders about that).

Another very a minor point, the preferred value for the BuildRoot tag is
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
This is not a blocker.

I was unable to build this in mock for the development target due to expect
having a broken dep on libtcl8.4.so at the moment.

NEEDSWORK

-- 
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.