Bug 520570
Summary: | Review Request: devio - Read and write utility for block devices | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Dan Horák <dan> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Martin Gieseking <martin.gieseking> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, martin.gieseking, notting, pahan |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | martin.gieseking:
fedora-review+
j: 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: | 2009-09-17 12:31:30 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
Dan Horák
2009-09-01 07:31:24 UTC
Dan, the devio manual page mentions section 8 while you put it into man1 (which is the right place, I think). Shouldn't the section number be adapted (i.e. replace .TH DEVIO 8 by .TH DEVIO 1 in devio.man)? Looks like the man page section reflects the old location (sbin) of the binary, patch with a fix posted upstream. Updated spec URL: http://fedora.danny.cz/devio.spec Updated SRPM URL: http://fedora.danny.cz/devio-1.2-2.fc12.src.rpm Here's my review of this small package. I didn't find any further issues to be fixed, but maybe you can add the following text from the devio website to the description in order to make its purpose a bit clearer: The primary difference between devio and other command line utilities, such as dd and cat, is that it is not stream based - it writes directly into the object rather than reading and writing a stream of data. The wrong section number in devio.man is not a blocker. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-11-x86_64/result/devio-* 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. --------------------------------- keys used in following checklist: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. - according to COPYING and boilerplate: MIT (modern style with sublicense) [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: License file must be included in %doc. - COPYING added to %doc [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: Packaged tarball must match the upstream source. md5 hash: 5d332c2bffc0791367bcf3368ba1a0d1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. - koji scratch build is successful: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1684182 [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. - no explicit build dependencies necessary [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. - no locales [.] MUST: Packages with shared libraries must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. - no shared libs [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable,... - not relocatable [.] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. - doesn't create directories [+] MUST: Files must not listed more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. - no large docs [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. - no header files packaged [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. - no static libs [.] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' - no pkgconfig files [.] MUST: .so files must go in a -devel package. - no .so files [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency - no devel package [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. - no .la files created during build [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file. - no GUI [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. - builds in mock [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. - builds in koji [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. - no scriptlets required [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. - no subpackages ------------------------ The package is APPROVED. ------------------------ I was thinking about adding the same sentence to the description :-) Thanks for the review. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: devio Short Description: Read and write utility for block devices Owners: sharkcz Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-5 CVS done. Imported and built. |