Bug 437694
Summary: | Review Request: bip - IRC Bouncer | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Lorenzo Villani <lorenzo> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | low | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | dpierce, fedora-package-review, gvarisco, jeff, kevin, notting, susi.lehtola |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | tcallawa:
fedora-review+
kevin: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2008-05-20 16:54:07 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Lorenzo Villani
2008-03-16 15:32:10 UTC
I can't sponsor you, but as reviewer I just tried to build it and it seems OK. Gianluca. verify that it builds is one step, but for a proper review you should follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines Gianluca. verifying that it builds is one step, but for a proper review you should follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines I haven't tried bip out yet, but version 0.7.2 of bip is out... Spec URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/specs/network/bip.spec SRPM URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/bip-0.7.2-1.fc8.src.rpm Bumped to the new version *** Bug 442219 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Spec URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/specs/network/bip.spec SRPM URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/bip-0.7.2-2.fc8.src.rpm * Sun Apr 13 2008 Lorenzo Villani <lvillani> - 0.7.2-2 - Added AUTHORS, ChangeLog, COPYING, INSTALL, README, TODO to docdir - added --enable-ssl to %configure, just to make sure that bip is built with SSL support using OpenSSL Please do not package INSTALL. It is only useful for people building from source. Spec URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/specs/network/bip.spec SRPM URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/bip-0.7.2-3.fc8.src.rpm * Mon Apr 14 2008 Lorenzo Villani <lvillani> - 0.7.2-3 - Removed INSTALL from %doc FYI: Darryl L. Pierce (dpierce) wants to co-maintain this package and I agreed to co-maintain the package with him. One very minor thing, instead of: rm -rf %{buildroot}/usr/share/doc/bip Please use: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_defaultdocdir}/bip Why? 1. You need to be consistent with $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}. You've already used $RPM_BUILD_ROOT above this line. 2. _defaultdocdir == /usr/share/doc Also, this isn't building with the Fedora OPTFLAGS. Making this change will resolve it: Before: make %{?_smp_mflags} After: make %{?_smp_mflags} CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" Oh yes, rpmlint says: bip.src:52: W: macro-in-%changelog doc bip.src:56: W: macro-in-%changelog configure bip.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/bip-0.7.2/ChangeLog Please resolve these three warnings (hint, if you have any %macros in changelog entries, change them to %%macros). To fix the ChangeLog, do this in %prep: iconv -f iso-8859-1 -t utf-8 -o ChangeLog{.utf8,} mv ChangeLog{.utf8,} Show me a new SPEC/SRPM with all of these items resolved and I'll finish the review. Spec URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/specs/network/bip.spec SRPM URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/bip-0.7.2-4.fc9.src.rpm * Wed Apr 30 2008 Lorenzo Villani <lvillani> - 0.7.2-4 - Convert ChangeLog to utf-8 in prep - Ensure that package is compiled using RPM_OPT_FLAGS - Make usage of RPM_BUILD_ROOT consistent - Removed macros from ChangeLog (bad mistake) I don't think you need that explicit Requires: openssl, since the package picks it up automatically (see libcrypto.so.7 and libssl.so.7): Requires: libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libcrypto.so.7()(64bit) libssl.so.7()(64bit) openssl rtld(GNU_HASH) Also, the license should be GPLv2+, not GPLv2. Minor distinction, but the code all has: * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * See the file "COPYING" for the exact licensing terms. Make those two corrections and I'll approve. REVIEW ======= - rpmlint checks return nothing. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPLv2+) OK, text in %doc - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (94c1b44bd49c65dde5d006b2df236449a53a1aa9) - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file Spec URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/specs/network/bip.spec SRPM URL: http://rpm.binaryhelix.org/bip-0.7.2-4.fc9.src.rpm * Wed Apr 30 2008 Lorenzo Villani <lvillani> - 0.7.2-5 - Corrected License field - Removed openssl from Requires Approved. :) I will also sponsor you. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: bip Short Description: IRC Bouncer Owners: arbiter Branches: F-9 EL-5 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes cvs done. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: bip Updated Fedora Owners: arbiter,mcpierce I don't see mcpierce in the cvsextras group. Have they been sponsored? Can you double check the name? Kevin: I was sponsored by T Callaway. It doesn't look that way. Or at least, the process is not complete because currently mcpierce is not yet in the cvsextras group. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/user/view/mcpierce Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: bip Updated Fedora Owners: arbiter,mcpierce cvs done. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: bip New Branches: epel7 Owners: bcl mcpierce mmahut Git done (by process-git-requests). |