Bug 380951
| Summary: | Review Request: i2c-tools - A heterogeneous set of I2C tools for Linux | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Hans de Goede <hdegoede> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | j:
fedora-review+
kevin: 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: | 2007-11-20 21:07:15 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
Hans de Goede
2007-11-13 20:47:02 UTC
Does the eepromer package really not need the main package? I'm going to assume that's the case, but it seems odd that it wouldn't need the devices that the main package sets up. What happened to the decode-xeon.pl script? And why is decode-edid.pl removed? Is it because there's an external dependency? Other than those questions, I see nothing that needs comment. Review: * source files match upstream: 9fda4ceff4ff6f9e4f45272972f00ac08631d1edb6f5f554c2d085db77ef6b51 i2c-tools-3.0.0.tar.bz2 * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summaries are OK. * descriptions are 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 (none) * 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: i2c-tools-3.0.0-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm i2c-tools = 3.0.0-1.fc9 = /usr/bin/perl perl >= 0:5.004 perl(Fcntl) perl(POSIX) perl(strict) perl(vars) udev i2c-tools-eepromer-3.0.0-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm i2c-tools-eepromer = 3.0.0-1.fc9 = (none) * %check is not present; no way to test automatically. * 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 -docs 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 (In reply to comment #1) > Does the eepromer package really not need the main package? I'm going to assume > that's the case, but it seems odd that it wouldn't need the devices that the > main package sets up. > My bad, I forgot about the devices, I'll add a dep before import. > What happened to the decode-xeon.pl script? I don't know I've just send a mail upstream asking > And why is decode-edid.pl removed? This was already done in the upstream provided specfile I uses as a base, I've asked why in the same mail. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: i2c-tools Short Description: A heterogeneous set of I2C tools for Linux Owners: jwrdegoede Branches: devel only (its part of lm_sensors in F-8 / F-7) InitialCC: <empty> Cvsextras Commits: Yes cvs done. Imported and build, closing. And thanks for the review! |