Bug 240543 (dsmidiwifi)
Summary: | Review Request: dsmidiwifi - remote controll midi with your Nintendo DS | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Till Maas <opensource> |
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: | j:
fedora-review+
kevin: 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: | 2008-02-02 12:53:35 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
Till Maas
2007-05-18 12:31:51 UTC
This sure has been sitting around for a while. I don't know why; it doesn't look too complicated. One question I have is whether you actually need to play those games with the upstream tarball. The only time you need to remove content like that is when it's something we can't legally ship. Bonehead stuff like upstream shipping built executables in the tarball isn't something we have to get rid of. Spec URL: http://till.fedorapeople.org/review/dsmidiwifi.spec SRPM URL: http://till.fedorapeople.org/review/dsmidiwifi-1.01a-2.tillf8.src.rpm (In reply to comment #1) > like that is when it's something we can't legally ship. Bonehead stuff like > upstream shipping built executables in the tarball isn't something we have to > get rid of. I did not know this when I created the spec, here is a new SRPM/Spec that also has an updated License Tag. Thanks. Builds fine and rpmlint finds nothing to complain about. Everything else looks good as well. * source files match upstream: 44a0e626e5284b187ba5eda8f72dc81ab2e1c59e3386ef5b5723907a97f973ee dsmidiwifi-v1.01a.tgz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK (it's a little thin, but it's what upstream uses and I can't really think of anything better) * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: dsmidiwifi = 1.01a-2.fc9 = libQtCore.so.4()(64bit) libQtGui.so.4()(64bit) libQtNetwork.so.4()(64bit) libasound.so.2()(64bit) libasound.so.2(ALSA_0.9)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I have a DS but no way to get homebrew apps to it to test this. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. APPROVED New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: dsmidiwifi Short Description: DS music interface Owners: till Branches: InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes Oh I forgot this: Thank you for the review Jason. cvs done. |