Bug 232406 (unpaper)
| Summary: | Review Request: unpaper - Post-processing of scanned and photocopied book pages | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Bernard Johnson <bjohnson> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | manuel wolfshant <manuel.wolfshant> |
| Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | federicoleva |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | manuel.wolfshant:
fedora-review+
gwync: 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: | 2007-03-20 20:04:43 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
Bernard Johnson
2007-03-15 09:47:14 UTC
GOOD - rpmlint does not return anything, either on source or on binary rpm - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream, is latest version, sha1sum is c61552c71184ca7021a6b1737dbd7b35ae77fd19 /home/wolfy/unpaper-0_2.tgz - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no BR at all (just gcc which is in exception list) - no locales - not relocatable - owns all files and directories that it creates, does not take ownership of foreign files/directories - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - not a GUI, so no need for .desktop file - no .la / static/ .pc files SHOULD - package builds fine in mock / devel /x86_64 - works OK (from gscan2pdf ...) package APPROVED One thing that I'd like to point out before this package is imported: The tarball contains a binary. Does this warrant a rebuild of the tarball or do we just ignore it? I've noticed that there is a debian binary inside. Best option would be (I think) to ping upstream to re-release the software sources without the binary (that's why we call it "sources", right ?), and provide a separate binary if he wishes to. Otherwise, as http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?highlight=%28Packaging%29#head-c23c2cd3782be842dc7ab40c35199c07cfbfe347 is pretty clear that no binaries should be included, I guess the only option is to repackage the source, adding a comment in the spec explaining the reason for this action. I will remove the binary from the fedora sources and ping upstream about it. Spec URL: http://www.symetrix.com/~bjohnson/projects/Fedora-Extras/unpaper.spec SRPM URL: http://www.symetrix.com/~bjohnson/projects/Fedora-Extras/unpaper-0_2-2.fc6.src.rpm * Mon Mar 19 2007 Bernard Johnson <bjohnson> - 0_2-2 - repackage tgz file without included ELF binary New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: unpaper Short Description: Post-processing of scanned and photocopied book pages Owners: bjohnson Branches: FC-5 FC-6 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: unpaper New Branches: epel7 Owners: bjohnson Git done (by process-git-requests). |