Bug 226026 - Merge Review: libgtop2
Merge Review: libgtop2
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Parag AN(पराग)
Fedora Package Reviews List
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2007-01-31 14:24 EST by Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Modified: 2010-10-06 15:31 EDT (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2010-10-05 00:52:08 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---
panemade: fedora‑review+

Attachments (Terms of Use)
spec cleanup (2.62 KB, patch)
2010-09-24 05:44 EDT, Parag AN(पराग)
no flags Details | Diff

  None (edit)
Description Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it 2007-01-31 14:24:52 EST
Fedora Merge Review: libgtop2

Initial Owner: sandmann@redhat.com
Comment 1 Marcin Zajaczkowski 2007-03-03 13:20:39 EST
That's my first review of someone's else package so please be understanding and
make your suggestions to my review.

- rpmlint reports warning (see below)
+ packagename is fine
+ specfile name is fine
+ license GPL, inlcuded in %doc
+ md5sum matches upstream
- BuildRequires - suggestions below
+ locales OK
+ ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ no problems with directories
+ no duplicates in %files
+ %defattr is set
+ %clean section looks good
+ macros are used
+ headres in -devel
+ .la files removed
+ pkgconfig in Requires (due to .pc files)
- not clear build options (see below)


rpmlint warings:
W: libgtop2 summary-not-capitalized libgtop library (version 2)
W: libgtop2 mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 8, tab: line 7)

Summary sections SHOULD be extended.
"libgtop library (version 2)" doesn't say too much for most people.

texinfo doesn't seem to be required (in my opinion) and SHOULD be removed. info
file is created without it (and is deleted anyway by a command in spec file).
texinfo depends on several other packages.

gtk-doc package won't be needed in gtk-doc files are not intended (see below)


gtk-doc files are created despite of the option --disable-gtk-doc in configure.
It could be problem with upstream. I'm not sure if gtk-doc are intended or not
because in %files section there is "%{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/libgtop".
In libgtop2-devel for FC5 there are not that files. In FC7 they are.
When gtk-doc is not available in a system libgtop is built without them, so if
those files are not needed gtk-doc (depends on several other packages) could be
removed from BuildRequires list (if the next point was changed).

In SRPMS there is a patch (libgtop-2.0.2-prog_as.patch) which adds "AM_PROG_AS"
to configure.in. I'm not an expert of automake, but I'm not sure if it's
required, because without it libgtop2 builds just fine. Maybe it was required
only in libgtop-2.0.x series?
This patch has also one side effect. Because it changes configure.in configure
script has to be rebuilt and to do that gtk-doc is required (which wouldn't be
omited if gtk-doc's files are not intended to be in a package).

Btw, I changed status to NEEDINFO from Assignee (should be the owner of a
package), but I'm not sure about that status.
Comment 2 Marcin Zajaczkowski 2007-03-29 09:58:07 EDT
No response for 4 weeks. Needinfo targed changed to (probable) maintainer (who
should get last notification anyway).
Comment 3 Parag AN(पराग) 2010-09-24 05:44:21 EDT
Created attachment 449376 [details]
spec cleanup

    I have removed libs.patch as I don't see any effect of it in existing spec written. Please approve attached patch.
Comment 4 Parag AN(पराग) 2010-10-05 00:52:08 EDT
Removed libs patch.

Applied cleanup patch in build libgtop2-2.28.2-2.fc15 

Comment 5 Marcin Zajaczkowski 2010-10-06 15:31:12 EDT
I've already lost all hope to see anything in that issue (3,5+ years :) ). Thanks for interest.

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