[Bug 458204] Review Request: coredumper - Library to help applications create core dumps

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Aug 24 14:04:48 UTC 2008

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


--- Comment #1 from Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray at gmail.com>  2008-08-24 10:04:47 EDT ---
MUST Items: 

OK - rpmlint is clean
OK - follows Naming Guidelines
OK - spec file is named as %{name}.spec

xx - package does not meet Packaging Guidelines
    + Why does the -devel subpackage have 'Requires: automake'? The sample Spec
      included in the upstream tarball (packages/rpm/rpm.spec) does not have it
    + Please add a %check stanza as:
      make check
      According to the README, a 'BuildRequires: binutils gdb' will be needed
      to run the tests.
    + Moving the library headers from %{_includedir}/google to
      %{_includedir}/%{name} will break the builds of programs which contain
      '#include <google/coredumper.h>'. If similar Google projects are also
      using %{_includedir}/google, then you might not need to move the files.
      Otherwise, if you want to move them there are a few options:
      - Provide a README.Fedora in %doc as mentioned in
        to document this.
      - Provide a pkgconfig file which has 'Cflags: -I${includedir}/coredumper'
      - Initiate a discussion on fedora-packaging at redhat.com
      - It is better to pass --includedir=DIR to %configure instead of using
        the mkdir & mv dance to change the location of the headers.
    + No need to 'find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name "*.a" -delete' in
      %install since --enable-static=no was passed to %configure.
    + You could consider shipping ChangeLog under %doc, and putting README in
      the -devel subpackage since it talks about the examples and manual pages.
      README also mentions 'src/coredump_unittest.c' so it might be a good idea
      to ship this single file under %doc in the -devel subpackage.

OK - license meets Licensing Guidelines
OK - License field meets actual license
OK - upstream license file included in %doc
OK - spec file uses American English
OK - spec file is legible
OK - sources match upstream sources
OK - package builds successfully

xx - ExcludeArch is needed
     This library has been tested only on %{ix86} x86_64 and arm (see README),
     and it has been specifically mentioned that it does not work on ppc (see
     ChangeLog). You MUST ExcludeArch atleast ia64, ppc and ppc64. Work is on
     to port Fedora to arm and sparc, so you might want to exclude them as
     well. Once the package is approved please file a bug each for ia64, ppc
     and ppc64, and make them block the following trackers respectively:
     Also add a comment in the Spec above the ExcludeArch line mentioning the
     bug numbers for ia64, ppc and ppc64.

OK - build dependencies correctly listed
OK - no locales
OK - %post and %postun invoke ldconfig
OK - package is not relocatable

xx - file and directory ownership
     + The %files stanza for the -devel subpackage is broken. It should be
       fixed to have '%dir %{_includedir}/%{name}'. Otherwise the
       %{_includedir}/coredumper directory will not be owned by the package:
       [rishi at ginger SPECS]$ rpm -qf /usr/include/coredumper
       file /usr/include/coredumper is not owned by any package
       [rishi at ginger SPECS]$
     + It might be better not to mention the compression suffix (ie. .gz) for
       the manual pages.

OK - no duplicates in %file
OK - file permissions set properly
OK - %clean present
OK - macros used consistently
OK - contains code and permissable content
OK - -doc is not needed
OK - contents of %doc does not affect the runtime
OK - header files in -devel
OK - no static libraries
OK - no pkgconfig files
OK - library files without suffix in -devel
OK - -devel requires base package
OK - no libtool archives
OK - %{name}.desktop file not needed
OK - does not own files or directories owned by other packages
OK - buildroot correctly prepped
OK - all file names valid UTF-8


OK - upstream provides license text
xx - no translations for description and summary
OK - package builds in mock successfully
OK - package builds on all supported architectures

xx - package functions as expected
     + Only works on %{ix86}, x86_64 and arm. Other architectures should be,
       especially ia64, ppc and ppc64, should be excluded.

OK - scriptlets are sane
OK - subpackages other than -devel are not needed
OK - no pkgconfig files
OK - no file dependencies

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.

More information about the package-review mailing list