Bug 475040

Summary: Review Request: wol - Wake On Lan client
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Fabian Affolter <mail>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Jason Tibbitts <j>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: 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: 2009-01-07 09:17:04 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:

Description Fabian Affolter 2008-12-06 22:11:39 UTC
Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/wol.spec
SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/wol-0.7.1-1.fc9.src.rpm

Project URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/wake-on-lan/

Description:
wol implements Wake On LAN functionality in a small program. It wakes up
hardware that is Magic Packet compliant. SecureON is supported by wol too.

Koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=984511 

rpmlint output:
[fab@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint wol*
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

[fab@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint wol*
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2008-12-07 00:03:21 UTC
Your Source0: URL is not correct.  You can use spectool -g to make sure that your sources are downloadable.  I think you want:
  http://downloads.sourceforge.net/wake-on-lan/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
instead.

Your license tag does not seem to be correct.  At least the source files I looked at are GPLv2+.  Where do you see the restriction to GPLv2 only?


* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
   e0086c9b9811df2bdf763ec9016dfb1bcb7dba9fa6d7858725b0929069a12622  
   wol-0.7.1.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.
X license field does not match the actual license.
* 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.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   wol = 0.7.1-1.fc11
   wol(x86-64) = 0.7.1-1.fc11
  =
   /bin/sh
   /sbin/install-info

* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* 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 (info page installation).
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

The package review process needs reviewers!  If you haven't done any package
reviews recently, please consider doing one.

Comment 2 Fabian Affolter 2008-12-07 13:23:19 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Your Source0: URL is not correct.  You can use spectool -g to make sure that
> your sources are downloadable.  I think you want:
>   http://downloads.sourceforge.net/wake-on-lan/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
> instead.

fixed

> Your license tag does not seem to be correct.  At least the source files I
> looked at are GPLv2+.  Where do you see the restriction to GPLv2 only?

You are right, the license is GPLv2+.  The headers in the source point to GPLv2+.

Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/wol.spec
SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/wol-0.7.1-2.fc9.src.rpm

Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=985187

Comment 3 Jason Tibbitts 2008-12-07 19:22:16 UTC
Thanks.  The license tag is OK now and the Source0: URL is correct.

APPROVED

Comment 4 Fabian Affolter 2008-12-07 21:55:56 UTC
Thanks Jason for your review.

Comment 5 Fabian Affolter 2008-12-07 22:12:50 UTC
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: wol
Short Description: Wake On Lan client
Owners: fab
Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-5
InitialCC:

Comment 6 Kevin Fenzi 2008-12-08 00:35:50 UTC
cvs done.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2008-12-08 22:24:34 UTC
wol-0.7.1-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wol-0.7.1-2.fc10

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2008-12-08 22:24:37 UTC
wol-0.7.1-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wol-0.7.1-2.fc9

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2008-12-10 04:35:29 UTC
wol-0.7.1-2.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 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-newkey update wol'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2008-11081

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2008-12-10 04:37:52 UTC
wol-0.7.1-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 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 wol'.  You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2008-11106

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2009-01-07 09:17:01 UTC
wol-0.7.1-2.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2009-01-07 09:31:48 UTC
wol-0.7.1-2.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.