Bug 190129
Summary: | Review Request: python-krbV | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Mike Bonnet <mikeb> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | Flags: | wtogami:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-05-21 21:05:01 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: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
Mike Bonnet
2006-04-27 20:22:16 UTC
This has been waiting around for a review for a while now. Any chance of getting it reviewed? I'm no Python expert but I'll have a go. A few issues: specfile in srpm is mode 0600 and source tarball in srpm is mode 0664. Both should be 644. These probably don't matter once things are in CVS, but just in case I would fix them before checking in. There's no reason to BuildRequires: python; python-devel will pull it in (not a blocker). You use %{optflags} instead of $RPM_OPT_FLAGS (which is fine), but still use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead of %{buildroot}. The guidelines explicitly discourage this: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-f3d77b27a5d29dfc1f5600ef3fc836f2e317badf Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. X specfile is properly named and is cleanly written but does not use macros consistently (see $RPM_BUILD_ROOT comment above). * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible; license text is included in the package. * source files match upstream (makes sense; you are the upstream): b79db9912efd76ab9a88441e455455d4 python-krbV-1.0.12.tar.gz b79db9912efd76ab9a88441e455455d4 python-krbV-1.0.12.tar.gz-srpm * latest version is being packaged. O BuildRequires are proper (BR: python not needed but not a blocker). * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). O rpmlint is silent (it does warn about inappropriate permissions in the SRPM). * final provides and requires are sane: krbVmodule.so()(64bit) python-krbV = 1.0.12-2.fc6 - libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libkrb5.so.3()(64bit) libkrb5.so.3(krb5_3_MIT)(64bit) python(abi) = 2.4 python-abi = 2.4 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 * shared libraries are present, but internal to Python so there's no need to run ldconfig. * no .pyo files to %ghost. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. O file permissions are appropriate, except in the srpm. * %clean is present. O %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. New specfile and srpm posted: http://people.redhat.com/mikeb/python-krbV/python-krbV.spec http://people.redhat.com/mikeb/python-krbV/python-krbV-1.0.12-3.src.rpm Fixed .spec permissions (rpmbuild -ts was doing something funny). Removed BuildRequires: python Replaced $RPM_BUILD_ROOT with %{buildroot} Odd that the tarball is still mode 664, but this definitely won't matter after you import. Otherwise, everything looks good. APPROVED Thanks, built in devel. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: python-krbV New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 FC-5 |