Bug 648175
Summary: | Review Request: flterm - Firmware download program | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Shakthi Kannan <shakthimaan> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Chitlesh GOORAH <chitlesh> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | chitlesh, fedora-package-review, notting |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | j:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | flterm-0.9-2.fc14 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2010-11-17 23:17:18 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
Shakthi Kannan
2010-10-31 10:32:33 UTC
$ rpmlint flterm.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint flterm-0.9-1.fc15.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint flterm-0.9-1.fc15.i686.rpm flterm.i686: W: no-documentation flterm.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary flterm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Successful Koji builds for F-13, F-14, and F-15: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2566771 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2566757 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2566760 It fails on EL-6 due to non-availability of clang. Can you request the clang maintainer to rebuild it for EL-6 ? - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name} - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package is licensed (GPL) with an open-source compatible license and meet other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. - MUST: the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. - MUST: The spec file for the package is be legible. - MUST: The sources used to build the package must matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least i386. - MUST: All build dependencies is listed in BuildRequires. - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly. - MUST: If the package does not contain shared library files located in the dynamic linker's default paths - MUST: the package is not designed to be relocatable - MUST: the package owns all directories that it creates. - MUST: the package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly. - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: The package contains code, or permissable content. This is described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines. - MUST: There are no Large documentation files - MUST: %doc does not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. - MUST: There are no Header files or static libraries - MUST: The package does not contain library files with a suffix - MUST: Package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives - MUST: Package containing GUI applications includes a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. - MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. SHOULD Items: - SHOULD: The source package does include license text(s) as COPYING - SHOULD: mock builds succcessfully in i386. - SHOULD: The reviewer tested that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. - SHOULD: No scriptlets were used, those scriptlets must be sane. - SHOULD: No subpackages present. APPROVED New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: flterm Short Description: A serial terminal, and firmware download program. Owners: shakthimaan chitlesh Branches: F-13 F-14 F-15 InitialCC: shakthimaan We are not yet accepting f15 branches. That won't happen until f15 branches from rawhide. Git done (by process-git-requests). flterm-0.9-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/flterm-0.9-2.fc14 flterm-0.9-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/flterm-0.9-2.fc13 flterm-0.9-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 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 flterm'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/flterm-0.9-2.fc14 flterm-0.9-2.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. flterm-0.9-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |