Bug 454432

Summary: Review Request: libcmpiutil - Utility library for CIM providers
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Reporter: Daniel Veillard <veillard>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Daniel Berrangé <berrange>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 5.3CC: berrange, notting, pm-rhel, syeghiay
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: 2010-01-12 11:52:13 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: 188273, 445605    

Description Daniel Veillard 2008-07-08 13:39:51 UTC
Spec URL: http://veillard.com/libvirt/5.3/libcmpiutil.spec
SRPM URL: http://veillard.com/libvirt/5.3/src/libcmpiutil-0.4-1.el5.src.rpm
Description: 
Libcmpiutil is a library of utility functions for CMPI providers.
The goal is to reduce the amount of repetitive work done in
most CMPI providers by encapsulating common procedures with more
"normal" APIs.  This extends from operations like getting typed
instance properties to standardizing method dispatch and argument checking.

Comment 1 Daniel Veillard 2008-07-08 13:42:28 UTC
The only doubt I have is whether this should be
ExclusiveArch: i386 x86_64 ia64
or not. This is used only by libvirt-cim which is available
only on those arches. Since the library might be used by more
software for non-virtualization providers I decided to not
limit the arches.

Daniel

Comment 2 Daniel Veillard 2008-07-08 13:43:26 UTC
See also https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445605

Daniel

Comment 3 Daniel Riek 2008-07-15 18:24:53 UTC
What is this component? It is not planned for 5.3:
http://intranet.corp.redhat.com/ic/intranet/RHEL5u3ApprovedPackages

Comment 4 Daniel Riek 2008-07-15 18:34:40 UTC
Sorry I was confused. It *IS* on that list.

Comment 5 Daniel Berrangé 2008-09-15 09:15:12 UTC
Original Fedora review ticket:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=387261

Comment 6 Daniel Berrangé 2008-09-15 09:42:42 UTC
Successfully builds into binary RPMs for me. Passes rpmlint with no errors. Complies with Fedora packaging guidelines & licensing requirements.

=> Approved