[Bug 234749] Review Request: arm-gp2x-linux-binutils - Cross Compiling GNU binutils targeted at arm-linux

[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: arm-gp2x-linux-binutils - Cross Compiling GNU binutils targeted at arm-linux


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234749


kevin at tigcc.ticalc.org changed:

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




------- Additional Comments From kevin at tigcc.ticalc.org  2007-07-27 07:14 EST -------
+ rpmlint output OK:
  + SRPM and -debuginfo have empty output.
  + main package has this:
    W: arm-gp2x-linux-binutils non-standard-dir-in-usr arm-gp2x-linux
    which is OK for a cross-toolchain package
+ named and versioned according to the Package Naming Guidelines
+ spec file name matches base package name
+ Packaging Guidelines:
  + License GPL OK, matches actual license
  + No known patent problems
  + No emulator, no firmware, no binary-only or prebuilt components
  + Complies with the FHS (with the cross-toolchain exception 
for %{_prefix}/%{target})
  + proper changelog, tags, BuildRoot, Requires (none needed), BuildRequires 
(likewise), Summary, Description
  + no non-UTF-8 characters
  + relevant documentation is included
  + RPM_OPT_FLAGS are used
  + debuginfo package is valid
  + no static libraries nor .la files
  + no duplicated system libraries
    (libiberty is always static, bfd is target-specific, so neither of those 
can be shared with the native version)
  + no rpaths, at least on i386 (I ran readelf -d on the executables)
  + no configuration files, so %config guideline doesn't apply
  + no init scripts, so init script guideline doesn't apply
  + no GUI programs, 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 (very clear actually, I don't know why everyone was 
scared away ;-) )
+ source matches upstream:
  MD5SUM: 6a9d529efb285071dad10e1f3d2b2967
  SHA1SUM: 5c80fd5657da47efc16a63fdd93ef7395319fbbf
+ builds on at least one arch (F7 i386 live system)
+ no known non-working arches, so no ExcludeArch needed
+ no missing BR (none needed)
+ translations are disabled (because they'd conflict with the native versions), 
so translation/locale guidelines don't apply
+ no shared libraries, so no ldconfig calls needed
+ 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 (%configure not used for several reasons, 
including it playing jokes with --target and upstream recommending building 
outside the source directory)
+ 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
+ no shared libraries, so .so symlink guidelines don't apply
+ no -devel package, so the guideline to require the main package in it doesn't 
apply
+ no .la files
+ no GUI programs, so no .desktop file needed
+ buildroot is deleted at the beginning of %install
  (Nitpick: But I 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. 
Sure, building outside of mock is not recommended, but this doesn't mean people 
doing it and not redefining %{_tmpdir} deserve to get 0wn3d by the first script 
kiddie with a shell account on the machine.)
+ all filenames are valid UTF-8

SHOULD Items:
+ license already included upstream
+ no translations for description and summary provided by upstream
* Skipping mock test.
* Skipping the "all architectures" test, I only have i386.
+ package functions as described (tested arm-gp2x-linux-as and 
arm-gp2x-linux-objdump on this trivial source:
add r1,r1,r1
add r1,r1,r1)
+ 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

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.