Bug 1074595 - Review Request: systeminfo - simple utility for viewing HW
Review Request: systeminfo - simple utility for viewing HW
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
All Linux
unspecified Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On: 1058038
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2014-03-10 11:33 EDT by Pavol Ipoth
Modified: 2016-12-15 01:38 EST (History)
8 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2016-12-15 01:37:44 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Pavol Ipoth 2014-03-10 11:33:13 EDT
Spec URL: http://www.symphaty.org/files/systeminfo.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.symphaty.org/files/systeminfo-1.2-1.fc20.src.rpm
Src URL: http://www.symphaty.org/files/systeminfo-1.2.tar.gz
Description: Simple utility for viewing several types of HW
Fedora Account System Username: p53

I am upstream developer package and i need sponsor as this is my first package

koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/tasks?owner=p53&state=all
Comment 1 nicolas.vieville 2014-10-22 05:27:28 EDT

I was in the way to propose you to make an unofficial review of this package (as I'm a Fedora candidate packager - need a sponsor), but I can see in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1058038 that Jeff Backus has already done it.

Is it still necessary? If this is still necessary, I'll tell Jeff Backus that this review request replaced your previous one, in case he would like to go further with his unofficial review.


Comment 2 Ranjan Maitra 2015-12-20 12:36:02 EST
The links are dead.
Comment 4 Ranjan Maitra 2015-12-20 19:47:14 EST
Please update to a supported Fedora version. Also update changelog and the version number.

THere are many errors and issues. 

1) If you are packaging python2 library or tools then your spec file should use %{__python2} macros only. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros

2) Its always a good practice to increase the release number when you provide updated package here. That will help what has changed since your last package update to new package update.

3) Note that python packaging guidelines have changed (See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file). You should change %build and %install to



This should have the exact same effect, but is standard and more concise.

4) Please run fedora-review tool and go through the output: it will catch the same errors and issues for you and thus make review quicker than a back-and-forth.
Comment 5 Parag AN(पराग) 2016-08-12 07:03:55 EDT
   Can you update the package with above suggestions?
Comment 6 Parag AN(पराग) 2016-12-15 01:37:44 EST
I don't see any update here which is waiting for Submitter to submit update.
I am closing this review now. When needed to work this back in future, just re-open this review bug.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.