Bug 432034 (cel)
| Summary: | Review Request: cel - Crystal Entity Layer | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Hans de Goede <hdegoede> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Christopher Stone <chris.stone> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, me, mtasaka, notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | chris.stone:
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: | 2008-03-14 17:53:18 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: | |||
| Bug Depends On: | 432033 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
Hans de Goede
2008-02-08 15:00:01 UTC
Note this package requires crystalspace who's review is bug 432033. I get the following rpmlint warnings: cel.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libceltool-1.2.so csStaticVarCleanup cel.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libcel_python-1.2.so csStaticVarCleanup cel.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libcel_python-1.2.so csStaticVarCleanup Please investigate. Be sure to include the license in %doc. (In reply to comment #2) > I get the following rpmlint warnings: > cel.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libceltool-1.2.so > csStaticVarCleanup > cel.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libcel_python-1.2.so > csStaticVarCleanup > cel.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libcel_python-1.2.so > csStaticVarCleanup > > Please investigate. I've investigated and it seems that this is intentional, because the files under /usr/bin, do report no errors with ldd -r, so the files under /usr/bin are providing this symbol, strange, but that seems to be how it is. (In reply to comment #3) > Be sure to include the license in %doc. I will do with the next revision (once a full review is done). I've asked Brad to do the review on this package as part of his sponsorship process. (In reply to comment #5) > I've asked Brad to do the review on this package as part of his sponsorship process. OK. Brad let me know if you cannot do the review this weekend. I will do it if you don't have the time or are unable to. Okay, Brad said he can't do the review. :( Hans, is there any reason why you are not calling ldconfig in %post/%postun? (In reply to comment #8) > Hans, is there any reason why you are not calling ldconfig in %post/%postun? Other then me being stupid / caffeine deprived at the time I wrote that? No. ==== REVIEW CHECKLIST ==== - rpmlint output See comment #4 - package named according to package naming guidelines - spec file name matches %{name} - package meets packaging guidelines - package licensed with a fedora approved license - license matches actual license X license file not included in %doc - spec file written in American English - spec file legible - source match upstream fafcd7c049d23d43efd8f7de465c6496 cel-src-1.2.tar.bz2 - successfully compiles on x86_64 F-8 - all build dependencies listed in BR - no locales X does not call ldconfig in %post/%postun (see comment #9) - package is not relocatable - package owns all directories it creates - no duplicates in %files - contains proper %clean - macro usage is consistent - contains code - large documentation in doc subpackage - files in %doc do not affect runtime - header files located in devel subpackage - no static libs - no pkgconfig files - no library files with suffix - devel subpackage requires base package - no libtool archives - not a GUI application - package does not own files or directories owned by other packages - buildroot removed on %install - filenames UTF-8 ==== MUST FIX ==== - Include license in %doc - Add %post/%postun sections which run ldconfig ==== SHOULD FIX ==== - Investigate if other files should be placed in %doc - Test for crashes and success in demo programs (In reply to comment #10) Thanks! > ==== MUST FIX ==== > - Include license in %doc > - Add %post/%postun sections which run ldconfig > Both fixed. > ==== SHOULD FIX ==== > - Investigate if other files should be placed in %doc Checked, nothing else interesting found (note there is 800KB worth of docs in the -docs package. > - Test for crashes and success in demo programs I don't understand what you mwan by this. New version: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/cel.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/cel-1.2-2.fc9.src.rpm Hi, this looks good. I'm going to be gone until next week. Can you try running the demos, IIRC one of them crashed on exit and I'm not sure if they all worked as intended. All must items fixed, APPROVED. Thanks for the review! New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: cel Short Description: Crystal Entity Layer Owners: jwrdegoede Branches: F-8 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: Yes Erm, oops that should be fedora-cvs -> ? cvs done. Imported and build, closing. |