[Bug 226536] Merge Review: webalizer

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Mar 18 10:54:00 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: webalizer


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226536


ruben at rubenkerkhof.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |ruben at rubenkerkhof.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




------- Additional Comments From ruben at rubenkerkhof.com  2007-03-18 06:53 EST -------
Hi Joe,

I'm happy to review your package.

Review for release 31:
* RPM name is OK
* Source webalizer-2.01-10-src.tar.bz2 is the same as upstream
* This is the latest version

Needs work:
* BuildRoot should be %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
  (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#BuildRoot)
* Encoding of spec should be UTF-8. iconv -f iso8859-1 -t utf-8 should do it.
* Missing SMP flags. If it doesn't build with it, please add a comment
  (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#parallelmake)
* Spec file: some paths are not replaced with RPM macros
  (wiki: QAChecklist item 7)
* The %makeinstall macro should not be used
  (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#MakeInstall)
* Please use the ?{dist} tag
* Remove the dot at the end of the Summary
* Replace BuildPreReq with BuildRequires
* shadow-utils and fileutils can be dropped, since they're always there
* Preserve timestamps when installing files
* Consider installing content in /usr/share/webalizer instead of /var/www

Minor:
* Duplicate BuildRequires: zlib-devel (by gd-devel), libpng-devel (by gd-devel)


-- 
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