Bug 1123217

Who is Andrew Ross? Where are you?

(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #1)
> Who is Andrew Ross? Where are you?

Andrew and I work together on the packaging side [1], but his not yet sponsored so I am pushing the reviewing instead.

1 - https://www.onedc.com/pipermail/obix-devel/2014-July/thread.html

Cheers,

Sam

1. Drop BuildRequires:  glibc-devel.

2. The -doc is just a crap if only contains README.md COPYING CODING_GUIDELINES.md. Put them in the main package, and -libs, remember the way depends on your needs(e.g CODING_GUIDELINES.md is only intended for development IMO so put it into -devel), but must put license file in main package.

3. Use %cmake macro, and drop -DLIB_DIR="%{_libdir}"

4. %post libs
-p /sbin/ldconfig

Weird.

%post libs
/sbin/ldconfig

5. %if 0%{?rhel}
%defattr(-, root, root)

rm -rf %{buildroot}

RHEL doesn't need them.

6. %attr(0755,root,root) %dir %{_sysconfdir}/obix
%attr(0755,lighttpd,lighttpd) %dir %{_sharedstatedir}/obix/histories

755 is redundant. Why did you set it?

7. ln -sf %{_sharedstatedir}/obix/histories %{buildroot}/%{_sysconfdir}/obix/res/server/

Reason?

8. Better to leave the Source tag as:

https://github.com/ONEDC/obix/archive/%{version}.tar.gz#/obix-%{version}.tar.gz

9. Requires:       lighttpd
Requires:       lighttpd-fastcgi

lighttpd-fastcgi depends on lighttpd, drop the explicit Requires of lighttpd.

And you should append the bits macro like you've done to the other packages:

Requires:       lighttpd-fastcgi%{?_isa}

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package

10. -DPROJECT_DOC_DIR_SUFFIX="%{name}-doc-%{version}"

F20+, use %{_pkgdocdir}

We use unversioned docdir just because it can help save the bookmarks, if you keep it versioned still, after the update the bookmark will be useless. Think of it.

> 4. %post libs
> -p /sbin/ldconfig
> 
> Weird.

Well, it's nearly correct. Just the second line should be appended at the end of the first line:

  %post libs -p /sbin/ldconfig

As to answer a "Why?": The "-p" is an option that overrides the program that shall run the scriptlet. By default, it would be /bin/sh. Here, it's /sbin/ldconfig that will be executed with an empty scriptlet.


> %post libs
> /sbin/ldconfig

That would run /bin/sh with a shell script that executes /sbin/ldconfig. A little bit superfluous if only running ldconfig is needed.


> %package        libs
> Summary:        Shared library files for %{name}
> Requires:       %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

So, if the -libs package requires the base package, then why split off this -libs package at all? It could not be installed independently.  The base package also doesn't explicitly require the -libs package, so it seems you've got the dependencies mixed up. An independent library package sort of becomes the real "base" package your other [sub-]packages should depend on explicitly (a reverse case of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package ).



> %files server

Looks like a few case of
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
and:
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems
that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please
respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the
submitter to proceed with the review.

If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the
fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take
this ticket.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket reviewer failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we reset the status and the assignee of this ticket.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.