Bug 1433686
| Summary: | Review Request: scram - Probabilistic risk analysis tool | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | ol.rakhimov |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | lemenkov, package-review |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | lemenkov:
fedora-review+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2017-03-30 01:20:17 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
ol.rakhimov
2017-03-19 10:38:52 UTC
I'll review it (and sponsor you eventually). REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is silent
Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/scram-0.12.0-1.fc25.src.rpm ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/scram-*
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SPECS:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (GPLv3 or later).
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included as %license.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.
Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum scram-0.12.0.tar.gz*
ff7c38e0b40ada5472f9521817e2ff890ecc2803909e895772f92a4ea30d4c90 scram-0.12.0.tar.gz
ff7c38e0b40ada5472f9521817e2ff890ecc2803909e895772f92a4ea30d4c90 scram-0.12.0.tar.gz.1
Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
0 The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+/- The package shouldn't list scram.1 as %docs and as man-page. Just modify %install section in the following way:
install -p -D -m 644 doc/scram.1 -t %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1/
rm -f doc/scram.1
install -p -D -m 644 scripts/scram.sh %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/bash-completion/completions/scram
There are other ways to handle this properly. This is minor issue anyway, so I don't see this as a blocker.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application.
0 No C/C++ header files.
0 No static libraries.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so) in some of the dynamic linker's default paths.
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages.
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
This package is
APPROVED.
Unblocking FE-NEEDSPONSOR - I've just sponsored Olzhas. Thanks Peter for the review and sponsorship! Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/scram scram-0.12.0-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-504a913664 scram-0.12.0-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-5c9dce6ae2 scram-0.12.0-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-5c9dce6ae2 scram-0.12.0-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-504a913664 scram-0.12.0-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. scram-0.12.0-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |