[Bug 225694] Merge Review: dictd

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225694


Lucian Langa <cooly@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




--- Comment #4 from Lucian Langa <cooly@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  2009-01-23 13:52:23 EDT ---
Thank you for the update.

I note you are not using %{?dist} tag, however this is not a blocker.

There is a test suite provided in the package, but it won't run correctly as
dictd drops privileges to user nobody and won't be able to create/append log
file _dictd.log in test/ directory. I'm not sure that's fixable.

Please consider using install -p for install to preserve timestamps of
installed
files.

Review:
OK  source files match upstream:
        1b316bf797ff239eb87110c18cd7d5d9  dictd-1.11.0.tar.gz
        d1883d09f65179a3b6aa16579cb5a7e9  libmaa-1.1.0.tar.gz
OK  package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK  specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros
consistently.
OK  summary is OK.
OK  description is OK.
OK  dist tag is not present.
OK  build root is OK.
OK  license field matches the actual license.
OK  license is open source-compatible.
OK  license text included in package.
OK  BuildRequires are proper.
OK  compiler flags are appropriate.
OK  %clean is present.
OK  package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
OK  package installs properly.
OK  debuginfo package looks complete.
OK  rpmlint is silent.
OK  final provides and requires are sane:
        config(dictd) = 1.11.0-2
        dictd = 1.11.0-2
        dictd(x86-64) = 1.11.0-2
        =
        /bin/sh
        chkconfig
        config(dictd) = 1.11.0-2
        initscripts
        libc.so.6()(64bit)
        libdbi.so.0()(64bit)
        libz.so.1()(64bit)
N/A %check is not present. Provided test suite won't correctly run
N/A no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK  owns the directories it creates.
OK  doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK  no duplicates in %files.
OK  file permissions are appropriate.
OK  scriptlets present look OK
OK  initscript looks OK.
OK  code, not content.
OK  documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
OK  %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK  no headers.
OK  no pkgconfig files.
OK  no static libraries.
OK  no libtool .la files.

APPROVED.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]