Spec URL: http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/dirvish/dirvish.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.marcanoonline.com/downloads/fedora/package_submissions/dirvish/dirvish-1.2.1-1.src.rpm
Dirvish is a fast, disk based, rotating network backup system. With dirvish you
can maintain a set of complete images of your filesystems with unattended
creation and expiration. A dirvish backup vault is like a time machine for your
First off, the spec says GPL but the license in certainly not the GPL:
Licensed under the Open Software License version 2.0
And as a bonus, v2.0 of that license shouldn't be used. But I think it's still
open source; it was version 1.1 that had problems.
Also, the actual license needs to be included in the package, since it's present
in the tarball.
* source files match upstream:
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
X license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
X License text included upstream but is not in the final package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (BR: perl is not necessary)
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
dirvish = 1.2.1-1.fc6
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* not a GUI app.
ooooops big mistake.. fixed
the OSL 2.0 is not recommended any more (it was superceded by version 2.1 and
3.0 but it was approved by the OSI (see http://opensource.org/licenses/osl-2.0.php)
Builds fine and looks good. The only issue is that rpmlint is now complaining:
W: dirvish invalid-license OSL
The license tag accurately describes the license, so this should be OK.
Package Change Request
Package Name: dirvish
New Branches: EL-5