[Bug 459016] Review Request: bunny - Instrumented C code security fuzzer

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459016





--- Comment #2 from Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray at gmail.com>  2008-10-14 18:20:56 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
    + Instead of just replacing -03 with -02 in the Makefile, you should try to
      use the value of RPM_OPT_FLAGS or %{optflags} as CFLAGS. See
      https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
      In this case, you could use:
      make CFLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS
    + According to
      https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps you
      should use 'install -p'.
    + You could consider adding CHANGES to %doc as it gives an indication of
      the direction the project is taking.

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
     The upstream page (http://code.google.com/p/bunny-the-fuzzer/) says:
     "Bunny is currently known to support Linux, ... on IA32 and IA64
     systems."
     One should note that IA64 is different from x86_64 or amd64. So it would
     be a good idea to cross-check whether IA64 has been mistakenly used to
     refer to x86_64 or amd64, and whether x86_64 or amd64 is supported or not.
     I think that x86_64 is supported since it seemed to work with gcc.x86_64.
     In case IA64 has been mistakenly used, we should ExcludeArch ia64,
     alongwith the other secondary architectures (ie., alpha, arm, s390, sparc)
     which might not be supported.

OK - build dependencies correctly listed
OK - no locales
OK - no shared libraries
OK - package is not relocatable
OK - file and directory ownership
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 - no header files
OK - no static libraries
OK - no pkgconfig files
OK - no library files
OK - -devel is not needed
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

SHOULD Items:

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
OK - package functions as expected
OK - scriptlets are not needed
OK - subpackages 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.