[Bug 531252] Review Request: lcgdm - LHC Computing Grid Data Management

Tue Apr 6 22:47:53 UTC 2010

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=531252

--- Comment #21 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen at cern.ch> 2010-04-06 18:47:49 EDT ---
Review:     lcgdm
Date:       6th April
Mock Build: F14 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2098329

* PASS: rpmlint output 
30 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 14 errors, 71 warnings.

I've sorted, grouped and removed duplicates here to make
it easier to read.

invalid-url Source0: lcgdm-1.7.4.4.tar.gz
 -> expected since built from cvs.

dpm.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time,
run-time, runtier
dpm-mysql.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) backend -> back end,
back-end, backed
  -> correct runtime and backend if you like but they are clearly in
     common usage in  this context. If you do it's obviously for all
     the descriptions but odmitted here.

dpm-mysql.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/dpm
dpm-mysql-copyd.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/dpmcopyd
dpm-mysql-srmv1.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/dpm-srmv1
dpm-mysql-srmv2.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/dpm-srmv2
dpm-mysql-srmv22.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file
/etc/logrotate.d/dpm-srmv2.2
dpm-postgres-nameserver.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file
/etc/logrotate.d/dpnsdaemon
lfc-mysql.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/lfcdaemon
lfc-postgres.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/lfcdaemon
  -> These are symlinks to real ones managed via "alternatives".

dpm-mysql.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/dpm dpmmgr
dpm-mysql-copyd.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/dpmcopy dpmmgr
dpm-mysql-nameserver.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/dpns dpmmgr
dpm-mysql-srmv1.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/dpm-srmv1 dpmmgr
dpm-mysql-srmv2.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/dpm-srmv2 dpmmgr
dpm-mysql-srmv22.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/dpm-srmv2.2 dpmmgr
lfc-dli.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/lfc-dli lfcmgr
lfc-mysql.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/lfc lfcmgr
  -> All expected since these users write the log files writes the log files.

dpm-postgres-nameserver.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/dpns dpmmgr
dpm-postgres-nameserver.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/dpns dpmmgr

* PASS: Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
Same as SVN module.
* PASS: spec file name same as  base package %{name}.
Yes.
* PASS: Packaging Guidelines.
Its clearly a hugh package but yes.
There are 
* PASS: Approved license in .spec file.
ASL 2.0
* NOTE: License on Source code.
Clear LICENSE file, most code is with out its own license header but

lcgdm-1.7.4.4/test/python/lfc/*.py looks 
to be GPL but as far as I can see this is not used
nor end ups in the binary RPMS. i.e it is fine.

socket/goputils/gop_synfo.c contains some GPL declarations
but again it does not looked to be used in anyway.

* PASS: Include LICENSE file or similar if it exist.
Included
* PASS: Written in American English.
Only if you want to change runtime and backend.
* COMMENT: Spec file legible. 
Some of the seds especially could do with a few more comments.
* PASS: Included source must match upstream source.
After checking out and removing the .svn directories.
$ diff -r --brief lcgdm-1.7.4.4 ../SPECS/lcgdm-1.7.4.4
produces nothing.

* PASS: Build on one architecture.
koji build
* PASS: Not building on an architecture must highlighted.
koji build
* PASS: Build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
koji build
* PASS: Handle locales properly. 
no locales
* PASS: ldconfig must be called on shared libs.
* PASS: No bundled copies of system libraries.
* PASS: Package must state why relocatable if relocatable.
Not relocatable.
* PASS: A package must own all directories that it creates
* PASS:  No duplicate files in %files listings. 
None
* PASS:  Permissions on files must be set properly. %defattr
%defattr is there.
* PASS:  %clean section contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
* PASS:  Each package must consistently use macros.
* PASS:  The package must contain code, or permissable content.
* PASS:  Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.  
No large docs.
* PASS:  %doc  must not affect the runtime of the application. 
* PASS:  Header files must be in a -devel package.
Yes.
* PASS:  Static libraries must be in a -static package.
No statics.
* PASS:  Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
No pkgconfig
* PASS:  devel packages must require the exact base package
They do
* PASS:  No .la libtool archives
None present
* PASS:  GUI apps should have %{name}.desktop file
No gui
* PASS:  No files or directories already owned by other packages. 
None
* PASS:  %install must run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
It does
* PASS:  All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.

Summary:

1. There are quite a few "install"s that could benefit from a "-p".
2. There are a few pretty complicated seds in there that have little or
   no comments with them. Might make it easier for someone else
   (me) to understand what is going on if more comment could be added.
3. You may want to take out the words backend and runtime which
   are apparently not words.

-- 
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.