Bug 413321 (inotail)
Summary: | Review Request: inotail - An inotify-enabled tail replacement | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jesse Keating <jkeating> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Parag AN(पराग) <panemade> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | dcantrell, fedora-package-review, moritz, notting |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | panemade:
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: | 2007-12-15 09:11:18 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
Jesse Keating
2007-12-06 02:19:20 UTC
do we need to care about CFLAGS here? man page is not following upstream timestamp. (In reply to comment #1) > do we need to care about CFLAGS here? Oops, forgot that. > man page is not following upstream timestamp. > Not sure what you mean by this. The man page is part of the archive, rpmbuild gzips it during install. http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/review/inotail.spec http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/review/inotail-0.5-3.src.rpm (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > do we need to care about CFLAGS here? > > Oops, forgot that. > > > man page is not following upstream timestamp. > > > > Not sure what you mean by this. The man page is part of the archive, rpmbuild > gzips it during install. > I guess its not needed( only for copying commands in SPEC) as per said in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-0239576e441f9ef53d175c4aec8c12868dffb5ab I see no issues with new SPEC. rpmlint is clean source matched upstream 82d4d05f86d6069e95c4b73e4004f15f inotail-0.5.tar.bz2 Packaging look good. APPORVED. Also, You may like to add disttag. oh yeah, the dist tag wasn't on the source of the spec, I added it. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: inotail Short Description: An inotify-enabled tail replacement Owners: jkeating Branches: InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes cvs done. Package already built for requested branch. Therefore, closing this review now. Can I re-open or append for improval? (If not, I'll file a new ticket.) The SPEC file has such a line in the %install section: chmod 0755 %{buildroot}/usr/bin/inotail a) Permissions can (or should?) be forced in the %files section using %attr. b) %{buildroot}/usr/bin must comply with the %files's %{_bindir}. One of the two is wrong. Assuming this tool has a very hand-crafted Makefile, and it is built using "prefix=%{buildroot}/usr", "/usr/bin" may (or may not) be the correct choice. Thanks for the tool, by the way. :) |