[Bug 756179] Review Request: aeolus-configserver - The Aeolus Audrey Config Server

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Nov 29 20:33:02 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=756179

Jim Meyering <meyering at redhat.com> changed:

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

--- Comment #6 from Jim Meyering <meyering at redhat.com> 2011-11-29 15:33:01 EST ---
You're good to go, Joe.

Here's the checklist:


>From https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines

MUST Items
Items marked as MUST are things that the package (or reviewer) MUST
do. If a package fails a MUST item, that is considered a blocker. No
package with blockers can be approved on a review. Those items must be
fixed before approval can be given.

 ok MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the
      build produces. The output should be posted in the review.

$ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc16.noarch.rpm
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/aeolus-configserver
aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/aeolus-configserver
aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/instance-config.rng aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/instance-config.rng aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver
aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver
aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/template.rng aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/template.rng aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/deployable.rng aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/deployable.rng aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/run/aeolus-configserver
aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/run/aeolus-configserver
aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/assembly.rng aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/assembly.rng aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema aeolus
aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid
/var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema aeolus
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.

The above are all ok, since aeolus is now a registered UID and GID name.

 ok MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
.
 ok MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in
      the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
 ok MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
 ok MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
      and meet the Licensing Guidelines .
 ok MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the
      actual license.
 ok MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
      license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of
      the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
 ok MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
 ok MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
 ok MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
      source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum
      for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package,
      please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.

    Verified by downloading the tgz file and comparing with what was installed:

    $ wget -O - \
      http://joev.fedorapeople.org/configserver/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1.tgz \
      | cmp - $(find ~/rpmbuild|grep 'configserv.*tgz') && echo ok
    ok

 ok MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary
      rpms on at least one primary architecture.
 NA MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on
      an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec
      in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a
      bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does
      not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be
      placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line.
 ok MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
      for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging
      Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply
      common sense.
 ok MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by
      using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly
      forbidden.
 NA MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
      library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's
      default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
 ok MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
 ok MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager
      must state this fact in the request for review, along with the
      rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this,
      use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker.
 ok MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it
      does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a
      package which does create that directory.
 ok MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the
      spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in
      specific situations)
 ok MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should
      be set with executable permissions, for example.
 ok MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
 ok MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
 ok MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
      definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement,
      but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or
      quantity).
 ok MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect
      the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc,
      the program must run properly if it is not present.
 ok MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
 ok MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
 ok MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix
      (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without
      suffix) must go in a -devel package.
 ok MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require
      the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires:
      %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 ok MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must
      be removed in the spec if they are built.
 ok MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a
      %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with
      desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your
      packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must
      put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
 ok MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by
      other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to
      be installed should own the files or directories that other packages
      may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora
      should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories
      owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have
      a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns,
      then please present that at package review time.
 ok MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.



SHOULD Items:
Items marked as SHOULD are things that the package (or reviewer) SHOULD
do, but is not required to do.

 ok SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
      separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
      include it.
 NA SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec
      file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages,
      if available.
 ok SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
 NA SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on
      all supported architectures.
NO* SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as
      described. A package should not segfault instead of running,
      for example.
 ok SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This
      is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine
      sanity.
 ok SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the
      base package using a fully versioned dependency.
 ok SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their
      usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be
      placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg
      itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or
      gdb.
 ok SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin,
      /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which
      provides the file instead of the file itself.
 ok SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If
      it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense.

[*] Joe walked me through an existing set-up.

-- 
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