[Bug 248120] Review Request: soprano - Qt wrapper API to different RDF storage solutions

[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: Review Request: soprano - Qt wrapper API to different RDF storage solutions


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248120


kevin at tigcc.ticalc.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From kevin at tigcc.ticalc.org  2007-07-13 19:01 EST -------
MUST Items:
+ rpmlint output OK:
  SRPM, soprano, soprano-debuginfo produce no warnings
  W: soprano-devel no-documentation - see "relevant documentation" below
+ named and versioned according to the Package Naming Guidelines
+ spec file name matches base package name
+ Packaging Guidelines:
  + License LGPL OK, matches actual license
  + No known patent problems
  + No emulator, no firmware, no binary-only or prebuilt components
  + Complies with the FHS
  + proper changelog, tags, BuildRoot, Requires, BuildRequires, Summary, 
Description
  + no non-UTF-8 characters
  ! relevant documentation is included
    While the minimum documentation is present, the upstream package also 
supports generating Doxygen documentation, which would be useful to package (in 
a -apidocs subpackage).
  + RPM_OPT_FLAGS are used (%cmake macro)
  + debuginfo package is valid
  + no static libraries nor .la files
  + no duplicated system libraries
  + no rpaths, at least on i386 (I ran readelf -d on the shared objects)
  + no configuration files, so %config guideline doesn't apply
  + no init scripts, so init script guideline doesn't apply
  + no executables, so no .desktop file present or needed
  + no timestamp-clobbering file commands
  + _smp_mflags used
  + scriptlets are valid
  + not a web application, so web application guideline doesn't apply
  + no conflicts
+ complies with all the legal guidelines
+ COPYING included as %doc
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ source matches upstream:
  MD5SUM: 703f11ca18f50c500b62cd44c84145e5
  SHA1SUM: df2179aa29eb1a7d4d21e82ef94699dfc497f388
+ builds on at least one arch (F7 i386 live system)
+ no known non-working arches, so no ExcludeArch needed
+ all build dependencies listed in CMakeLists.txt are listed in BuildRequires
  (However, an additional BuildRequires: doxygen will be needed for 
the -apidocs.)
+ no translations in original tarball, so translation/locale guidelines don't 
apply
+ ldconfig correctly called in %post and %postun
+ package not relocatable
+ ownership correct (owns package-specific directories, doesn't own directories 
owned by another package)
+ no duplicate files in %files
+ permissions set properly
+ %clean section present and correct
+ macros used where possible
+ no non-code content
+ no large documentation files, so no -doc package needed
+ %doc files not required at runtime
+ all header files in -devel
+ no static libraries, so no -static package needed
+ no .pc files, so no Requires: pkgconfig needed
+ /usr/lib/*.so symlink is correctly in -devel
+ /usr/lib/soprano/*.so plugin (NOT a symlink) is correctly NOT in -devel
+ -devel requires %{name} = %{version}-%{release} 
+ no .la files
+ no GUI programs (in fact, no executables at all), so no .desktop file needed
+ buildroot is deleted at the beginning of %install
  But I strongly recommend a:
  mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
  after the:
  rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
  to prevent a potential symlink attack as pointed out by the OpenSUSE folks.
+ all filenames are valid UTF-8

SHOULD Items: 
+ license already included upstream
+ no translations for description and summary provided by upstream
! I get a weird error in mock (tested FC6 i386 with Plague results and Rawhide 
i386, both on F7 build host):
  + %cmake .
  /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.20248: line 28: fg: no job control
  error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.20248 (%build)
  I don't know if this is my fault or if something's screwed in your package or 
the %cmake macro.
* Skipping the "all architectures" test, I only have i386.
* Can't really test that the package functions as described without building 
some KDE 4 stuff against it first, skipping for now.
+ scriptlets are sane
+ no subpackages other than -devel, so "Usually, subpackages other than devel 
should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency." is 
irrelevant
+ no .pc files, so "placement of .pc files" is irrelevant
+ no file dependencies

I see no real blockers except the strange error in mock. Thus, consider this 
APPROVED if you can get it to build in mock.

However:
1. It would be useful to package the Doxygen documentation:
* add BuildRequires: doxygen
* create an -apidocs subpackage
2. I'd also suggest adding the mkdir $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.