Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 226447
Merge Review: sysfsutils
Last modified: 2008-08-02 19:40:36 EDT
Fedora Merge Review: sysfsutils
Initial Owner: firstname.lastname@example.org
Should actually be assigned to email@example.com until someone picks it up for review, only needs
to be assigned over to me once a reviewer says there's something that needs my attention.
Jarod, here's a review. Things look mostly sane. The few minor issues are
noted below. I'll attach a patch that makes these changes. Feel free to use
some or all of it, with or without attribution. ;)
* source files match upstream:
* package meets naming and versioning 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.
The main package license should be GPLv2
(cmd/systool.c specifies v2 and has no "or any later version clause")
The libsysfs subpackage should be LGPLv2+
* license is open source-compatible.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (none are needed).
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (fedora-devel-x86_64,).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent. (not quite, but these warnings should be okay to ignore):
sysfsutils.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.1.0-2 2.1.0-1.fc9
libsysfs-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
* final provides and requires are sane
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
X scriptlets are properly run for libs
ldconfig needs to be run for the libsysfs subpackage
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* headers are in the -devel package
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.
Created attachment 291411 [details]
patch to fix minor issues for merge review
D'oh. This got lost in the shuffle... Just made these changes (more or less) to
rawhide, building now.
Todd: Did you want to mark this with fedora-review + ?
Jarod: You shouldn't usually close until it's been approved... ;)
Yep, I wanted to look back over it before I added the fedora-review +, since it
was a month ago that I did the review and my memory needs frequent refreshing.
It looks like everything is good. Thanks Jarod (and Kevin for poking :).
Whoops, sorry, my mistake... Got close-happy plowing through bugs yesterday... :)