Bug 473235

This builds but won't install for me on either rawhide or F-10.  I take it the needed version of system-config-date simply doesn't exist.  It might be nice when opening a review ticket to note that the package under review can't actually be installed.

The combination of Obsoletes, Conflicts and Requires seems rather odd to me.  I gather you're trying to make sure that if the old system-config-date is installed, the new one along with the -docs package are installed at update time, but without having system-config-date require this package.  That makes sense, but is the Conflicts actually necessary?

I think the scrollkeeper dependencies are backwards.  When I build this for F-10 or rawhide, the package comes out with a scrollkeeper dependency, but I thought scrollkeeper was gone.  Either that or %{fedora} is 10 but %{rhel} is simply undefined and so 0%{?rhel} < 6 is true.  I'm not entirely sure how the logic works out.

Also, this package can't go into F-8 as it is closed to new branches, and certainly nothing less than F-8 is supported, so you can probably just drop the 0%{?fedora} < 8 conditional.

As you suspected, the package can only installed with the related tool (with the same documentation stripped) which I plan to release together with this package (once the review is finished). Sorry for not having mentioned this.

I've uploaded new files to:
Spec: http://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/system-config-date-docs.spec
SRPM: http://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/system-config-date-docs-1.0.4-1.fc10.src.rpm

As discussed on IRC, the unnecessary Conflicts line is gone and the scrollkeeper/rarian_compat thing fixed. I think I'll keep the fedora < 8 as I don't want to unnecessarily make it complicated if people would rebuild the package on old Fedora versions.

New files with fixed rarian-compat dependencies at:

Spec: http://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/system-config-date-docs.spec
SRPM: http://nphilipp.fedorapeople.org/review/system-config-date-docs-1.0.5-1.fc10.src.rpm

Cool; I can grab the sources now, so nothing stops me from finishing this up.

This is essentially identical to the other system-config-*-docs packages, so I'll be brief.  rpmlint:
  system-config-date-docs.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided system-config-date
not a problem.

* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
   f04d7d7abf4aa8259a3a2b0ac789445621c363a40aadfbf76ad53285d7f18d92  
   system-config-date-docs-1.0.5.tar.bz2
* 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.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* rpmlint has acceptable complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* scriptlets are OK.
* acceptable content

APPROVED

Thanks for reviewing!

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: system-config-date-docs
Short Description: Documentation for setting the system date and time
Owners: nphilipp
Branches: F-9 F-10

cvs done.

Were you going to get these built and pushed on the release branches?  Or should these tickets be closed now?

Whoops, sorry, they're built already. Forgot about closing this with all the holidays and stuff.