Bug 568428
| Summary: | Review Request: libldb - A schema-less, ldap like, API and database | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | fedora-package-review, nalin, notting, ssorce |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | ssorce:
fedora-review+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2010-03-09 16:43:58 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
Stephen Gallagher
2010-02-25 17:48:13 UTC
Simo alerted me that there was a newer upstream version of libldb available. Better to work from that. Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgallagh/ldb/libldb.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgallagh/ldb/libldb-0.9.10-23.fc12.src.rpm It has been scratch-built in Koji successfully: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2014396 rpmlint output $ rpmlint libldb.spec libldb.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: libldb-0.9.10.tar.gz 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Looks like the prepping of the %install step does not conform to guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines Removal of the build root is absent (required for EPEL, not required for Fedora > 10 %{buildroot} should be preferred to $RPM_BUILD_ROOT so that variables are used consistently throughout the spec file. The rest looks good to me. MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability) the devel package seem to be failing this rule. Buildroot, %install and pkgconfig concerns have been addressed. Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgallagh/ldb/libldb.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~sgallagh/ldb/libldb-0.9.10-24.fc12.src.rpm It has been scratch-built in Koji successfully: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2014517 (In reply to comment #4) > MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for > directory ownership and usability) > > the devel package seem to be failing this rule. To be fair, RPM's been inserting this automatically since F10. (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #4) > > MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for > > directory ownership and usability) > > > > the devel package seem to be failing this rule. > > To be fair, RPM's been inserting this automatically since F10. Sorry, docs still say it is required so I simply applied the rule :) forgot to set review flag, doing now package looks good. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: libldb Short Description: A schema-less, ldap like, API and database Owners: sgallagh Branches: EL-5 InitialCC: Special requests: this package requires an EL-5 buildroot override to include libtalloc, libdtdb and libtevent (all of which are currently still in EL-5 updates-testing) CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). Please remember to dead.package and follow the end of life procedure if you don't want to ever build this on devel. For the overrides, please file a rel-eng trac ticket with what you need in the override. Make sure to use the EPEL component. Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: libldb New Branches: devel Owners: sgallagh, simo InitialCC: ssorce This package currently exists only as a backport for EL5, because it was previously carried as a subpackage of Samba. Upstream is now releasing this library independently, so we'd like to get it into rawhide. Rawhide was dead.packaged, retired and orphaned previously. I think that needs to go through a fresh package review. |