[Bug 387261] Review Request: libcmpiutil - Utility library for CIM providers

[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: libcmpiutil - Utility library for CIM providers


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=387261


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |tibbs at math.uh.edu




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-11-16 13:51 EST -------
Just some quick comments:

Builds OK; rpmlint says:

  libcmpiutil.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPL
You must specify LGPL version; see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing.

  libcmpiutil.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig
  libcmpiutil.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig
Best to use %post -p /sbin/ldconfig

  libcmpiutil-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm    
   /usr/src/debug/libcmpiutil-0.1/eo_parser.c
  libcmpiutil-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm 
   /usr/src/debug/libcmpiutil-0.1/libcmpiutil.h
  libcmpiutil-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm 
   /usr/src/debug/libcmpiutil-0.1/std_indication.c
  libcmpiutil-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm 
   /usr/src/debug/libcmpiutil-0.1/instance_util.c
  libcmpiutil-debuginfo.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang 
   /usr/src/debug/libcmpiutil-0.1/eo_util_parser.y
For some reason, your source files are executable.  Best to make them not
executable with a quick line in %prep.

  libcmpiutil-devel.x86_64: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/include
Definitely not OK for a package to own /usr/include.  You probably just want
  %{_includedir}/libcmpiutil/
in your %files section.

  libcmpiutil-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on libcmpiutil
The -devel subpackage needs to require the main package.  Just add
  Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}

Some other bits:

Why no parallel make?  (Well, it is a small package, but still...)

Dn't use %makeinstall; see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
and search for "Why the %makeinstall macro should not be used".

You should be consistent in your usage of %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.  You
can use whichever you like, but pick one and stick with it.

There's no reason for the -devel package to include the same documentation files
as the main package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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.