[Bug 708475] Review Request: pysdm - Python based Storage Device Manager

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Jun 1 03:33:48 UTC 2011


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=708475

Jerry James <loganjerry at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |loganjerry at gmail.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #2 from Jerry James <loganjerry at gmail.com> 2011-05-31 23:33:47 EDT ---
Unless you plan to use this spec file with EPEL also, you can remove the
BuildRoot tag, "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" at the top of %install, the %clean
section, and the %defattr line in %files.

+: OK
-: must be fixed
=: should be fixed (at your discretion)
N: not applicable

MUST:
[+] rpmlint output: shown in comment 1 (slightly different spelling
suggestions, but otherwise identical on my machine)
[+] follows package naming guidelines
[+] spec file base name matches package name
[=] package meets the packaging guidelines: the canonical URL for Source0 is
actually http://downloads.sourceforge.net/pysdm/pysdm-0.4.1.tar.gz, as noted in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Sourceforge.net.
[+] package uses a Fedora approved license
[-] license field matches the actual license: I don't see any license
statements, except on bundled code, and the top-level COPYING file is the LGPL.
 Where did "GPLv2" come from?
[+] license file is included in %doc
[+] spec file is in American English
[+] spec file is legible
[+] sources match upstream: md5sum is bc3b671ac95065c5121e056d820fd0a2 for both
[+] package builds on at least one primary arch (tried x86_64)
[N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch
[+] all build requirements in BuildRequires
[+] spec file handles locales properly
[N] ldconfig in %post and %postun
[-] no bundled copies of system libraries: This package bundles two files from
tepache (https://launchpad.net/tepache), namely tepache.py and
SimpleGladeApp.py.
[N] no relocatable packages
[+] package owns all directories that it creates
[+] no files listed twice in %files
[+] proper permissions on files
[+] consistent use of macros
[+] code or permissible content
[N] large documentation in -doc
[+] no runtime dependencies in %doc
[N] header files in -devel
[N] static libraries in -static
[N] .so in -devel
[N] -devel requires main package
[+] package contains no libtool archives
[+] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install
[+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages
[+] all filenames in UTF-8

SHOULD:
[N] query upstream for license text
[N] description and summary contains available translations
[+] package builds in mock: tried fedora-rawhide-i386
[+] package builds on all supported arches: tried i386 and x86_64
[+] package functions as described: minimal testing only
[+] sane scriptlets
[N] subpackages require the main package
[N] placement of pkgconfig files
[N] file dependencies versus package dependencies
[=] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts

-- 
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