[Bug 465928] Review Request: fbterm - a fast terminal emulator for linux with frame buffer device

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Oct 16 09:12:40 UTC 2008


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=465928





--- Comment #6 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade at gmail.com>  2008-10-16 05:12:38 EDT ---
Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide i386).
koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=883692
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and RPM.
+ source files match upstream.
f97c7a403fa0895349809c8d18355cbc  fbterm-1.1.tar.gz
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc files present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ defattr usage is correct.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code.
+ no static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage exists.
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available.
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ no scriptlets are used.
+ Not a GUI App.


Suggestions:-
1) I see following in build.log
configure: WARNING:     gpm.h dosn't exist! gpm mouse support will be disabled!
If you want you can add that support.
==> you can do that by adding BR:gpm-devel in SPEC

2) drop line in %build
CFLAGS="-D__GNUC__" ; export CFLAGS

3) defattr usage should be
%defattr(-,root,root,-)

4) Drop unnecessary file INSTALL from %docs

Make sure to fix above issues before committing to CVS.

APPROVED.

-- 
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