[Bug 694651] Review Request: IBSimu - Ion beam simulator

[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=694651

Golo Fuchert <packages at golotop.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #3 from Golo Fuchert <packages at golotop.de> 2011-04-17 17:00:28 EDT ---
Here we go with the review:

-----

[+] = ok
[o] = does not apply
[-] = needs work

-----

[+] rpmlint is not quiet yet, but all warnings will be addressed before the  
    build

rpmlint ./SPECS/IBSimu.spec ./SRPMS/IBSimu-1.0.4-2.fc14.src.rpm
./RPMS/i686/IBSimu-1.0.4-2.fc14.i686.rpm
./RPMS/i686/IBSimu-devel-1.0.4-2.fc14.i686.rpm ./SPECS/IBSimu.spec:15:
W: macro-in-comment %40jyu
IBSimu.src:15: W: macro-in-comment %40jyu
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

[+] The package is named according to the guidelines
[+] Spec file name matches base package name
[+] The package follows the Packaging Guidelines
[+] The license is an approved licence (GPLv2+)
[+] The License field matches the actual licence
[+] License file from source file is included in %doc
[+] The spec file is written in American English
[+] The spec file is legible
[+] Packaged sources match with upstream sources (md5)

md5sum libibsimu-1.0.4.tar.gz.*
00a0b5b4156b1f908a975de99af4b85c  libibsimu-1.0.4.tar.gz.packaged
00a0b5b4156b1f908a975de99af4b85c  libibsimu-1.0.4.tar.gz.upstream

[+] Package build at least on one primary architecture
[+] ExecludeArch is not known to be needed.
[+] All build dependencies are listed in the BuildRequires section
[o] No locales for the package
[+] Package stores shared libraries and calls ldconfig in %post/%postun
[+] Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
[o] Package is not relocatable
[+] Package owns all directories it installs.
[+] No files are listed more then once in the %files section
[+] File permissions are set properly (%defattr(...) is used)
[+] Consistent use of macros
[+] Package contains code and documentation only, no content
[+] No large documentation files (well, not large in size at least)
[+] %doc files do not affect runtime
[+] Header files packaged into a devel package
[o] No static libraries included
[o] library files ending with .so included in devel subpackage
[+] -devel subpackage properly requires base package
[+] No libtool .la archives included
[o] No GUI application, no need for a .desktop file
[+] Package does not own files or directories that are owned by other packages
[+] All filenames are valid UTF-8

SHOULD items:

[o] Source package does already include license text(s) as a separate file from
upstream.
[o] No other Non-English languages supported.
[+] The package builds in mock.
[o] No koji scratch build because of conditional build macros.
[o] No "runnable" program packaged to test.
[+] No "exotic" scriptlets used.
[o] No other subpackages other than devel.
[+] pkgconfig(.pc) files placed in -devel pkg.
[o] No file dependencies.
[o] No binaries/scripts -> no man pages needed

-----

Comments:

- The packager might consider if a -doc subpackage is appropriate (large number 
  of files but small size), however, the present state is totally acceptable.
- The only minor issues were addressed in comment #1 and will be fixed.

-----

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.