Bug 428717
| Summary: | Package Review of virt-viewer 0.0.2 requested | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 | Reporter: | Daniel Berrangé <berrange> | ||||
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Tim Burke <tburke> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | |||||
| Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | high | ||||||
| Version: | 5.2 | CC: | notting, pm-rhel, xen-maint | ||||
| Target Milestone: | rc | ||||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2008-09-15 09:10:30 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: | 428211 | ||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 188273, 428164 | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Daniel Berrangé
2008-01-14 19:53:30 UTC
Created attachment 291620 [details]
Proposed virt-viewer RPM
Original Fedora review notes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=252421 Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and RPM. + source files match upstream. 1bb5b589b20f45922a59da25d71c95b3 virt-viewer-0.0.1.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc files present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code. + no static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + Requires: libatk-1.0.so.0 libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) libcairo.so.2 libdl.so.2 libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0 libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0 libglib-2.0.so.0 libgmodule-2.0.so.0 libgnutls.so.13 libgobject-2.0.so.0 libgtk-vnc-1.0.so.0 libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0 libpango-1.0.so.0 libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 libvirt.so.0 libxenstore.so.3.0 libxml2.so.2 rtld(GNU_HASH) + Not a GUI app. No significant changes since the Fedora review. APPROVED. Setting flags... This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion, but this component is not scheduled to be updated in the current Red Hat Enterprise Linux release. If you would like this request to be reviewed for the next minor release, ask your support representative to set the next rhel-x.y flag to "?". Hi, the RHEL5.2 release notes will be dropped to translation on April 15, 2008, at which point no further additions or revisions will be entertained. a mockup of the RHEL5.2 release notes can be viewed at the following link: http://intranet.corp.redhat.com/ic/intranet/RHEL5u2relnotesmockup.html please use the aforementioned link to verify if your bugzilla is already in the release notes (if it needs to be). each item in the release notes contains a link to its original bug; as such, you can search through the release notes by bug number. Cheers, Don No idea why this BZ was still open when it was shipped long ago. |