Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 364241
Review Request: dash - Small and fast POSIX-compliant shell
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:12:21 EST
Spec URL: http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/dash.spec SRPM URL: http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/dash-0.5.4-1.fc8.src.rpm Description: DASH is a POSIX-compliant implementation of /bin/sh that aims to be as small as possible. It does this without sacrificing speed where possible. In fact, it is significantly faster than bash (the GNU Bourne-Again SHell) for most tasks.
Source0: should be a URL if possible; I changed it to http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/dash/files/dash-%{version}.tar.gz and everything seems fine. GPL+ in the License: tag seems a little odd for two reasons. The source file in question is clearly GPLv2+, but also it is simply a C file that gets compiled and run as part of its build process and then its output is used in the resulting executable. I am no expert here, but my understanding of things is that this does not put any part of the resulting executable under GPL. Since the accepted interpretation of the License: tag is that it applies to the binary package in isolation, I don't think the GPL makes it into the final package at all. I checked with spot on IRC and he concurs. So your License: tag can just be BSD. The only remaining complaint I have about this package is that the manpage says "sh", not "dash". Seems a bit odd to see "sh is the standard command interpreter for the system"; while that's true, this manpage doesn't describe that sh. Review: * source files match upstream: a9dc8f0237f632dd2c1bfeff80b1052e75fafaef0d767e3beab0bd8becced623 dash-0.5.4.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. X license field needs a tweak. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (none). * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane. * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I tested this package manually and it seems to work fine. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * doesn't create or own any directories. * 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. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. APPROVED; just tweak the License: tag when you check in.
I'm moving dash from /usr/bin/ to just /bin/ so it is a little safer as a /bin/sh replacement for people who want to experiment with boot performance. See http://wtogami.livejournal.com/20047.html