Bug 452921
Summary: | Review Request: libzrtpcpp - ZRTP support library for the GNU ccRTP stack | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Kevin Fenzi <kevin> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Jason Tibbitts <j> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | 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: | 2008-08-14 02:28:47 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: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 433265 |
Description
Kevin Fenzi
2008-06-25 21:18:45 UTC
I guess those rpmlint complaints boil down to; No docs for the -devel package. NEWS is executable. A couple of source files are executable, which makes rpmlint complain about the debuginfo package. These: libzrtpcpp.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libzrtpcpp-1.3.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libdl.so.2 libzrtpcpp.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libzrtpcpp-1.3.so.0.0.0 /lib64/librt.so.1 libzrtpcpp.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libzrtpcpp-1.3.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libgpg-error.so.0 libzrtpcpp.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libzrtpcpp-1.3.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6 aren't a serious issue but again it's a one line sed call to tweak libtool to make them go away. These are really trivial fixes and the unused-direct-shlib-dependency isn't really a blocker, so I'll trust you to do what's best when you check in. * source files match upstream: 5b4e5a439543541a041f68f30c203180198e3ced2d6df488ab1390be6d383cfc libzrtpcpp-1.3.0.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. The source files have a number of licenses (GPLv3+, GPLv2+ and what looks like an MIT variant) but the final product seems to be GPLv3+. * 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. X rpmlint has a few valid complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: libzrtpcpp-1.3.0-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm libzrtpcpp-1.3.so.0()(64bit) libzrtpcpp = 1.3.0-1.fc10 = /sbin/ldconfig libccgnu2-1.6.so.0()(64bit) libccrtp1-1.6.so.0()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit) libgcrypt.so.11(GCRYPT_1.2)(64bit) libgpg-error.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) libzrtpcpp-1.3.so.0()(64bit) libzrtpcpp-devel-1.3.0-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm libzrtpcpp-devel = 1.3.0-1.fc10 = libzrtpcpp = 1.3.0-1.fc10 libzrtpcpp-1.3.so.0()(64bit) pkgconfig * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I've no idea how to test this. * shared libraries installed: unversioned .so links are in the -devel package. ldconfig is called properly. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets OK (pkgconfig). * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * headers are in the -devel package. * pkgconfig files in the -devel package. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. APPROVED Thanks for the quick review. I will clean up those unused-direct-shlib-dependency errors before checking in. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: libzrtpcpp Short Description: ZRTP support library for the GNU ccRTP stack Owners: kevin Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: Yes cvs done. twinkle-1.2-3.fc9,libzrtpcpp-1.3.0-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9 twinkle-1.2-2.fc8,libzrtpcpp-1.3.0-2.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8 twinkle-1.2-2.fc8, libzrtpcpp-1.3.0-2.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update twinkle libzrtpcpp'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2008-6374 twinkle-1.2-2.fc8, libzrtpcpp-1.3.0-2.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. libzrtpcpp-1.3.0-2.fc9, twinkle-1.2-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. Done and pushed. Closing. Thanks for the review! |