[Bug 502600] Review Request: ocaml-ancient - OCaml library for large memory structures and sharing

[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=502600


Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




--- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx>  2009-06-04 00:01:34 EDT ---
Indeed, builds fine and rpmlint finds nothing to whine about.

I note there are what seem to three test files in the tarball.  Could they be
run at package build time?  It doesn't really look like it (at least one is
interactive) but I figured I'd ask.

I can't find anything wrong, so I'll just assume that the test stuff isn't
useful for a build-time test and approve this.

* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
   ef2e30318170b914527285dcb4c0ecfa138a0cdcef462ca874bb986b3840ce76  
   ancient-0.9.0.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.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
  ocaml-ancient-0.9.0-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm
   dllancient.so()(64bit)
   ocaml(Ancient) = a808df18618232a19217dd1014d99175
   ocaml-ancient = 0.9.0-1.fc11
   ocaml-ancient(x86-64) = 0.9.0-1.fc11
  =
   ocaml(Pervasives) = 88cb1505c8bdf9a4dcd2cdf3452732b4
   ocaml(Unix) = 0596a58544f8cd88fed5bf5432a53d43
   ocaml(runtime) = 3.11.0

  ocaml-ancient-devel-0.9.0-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm
   ocaml-ancient-devel = 0.9.0-1.fc11
   ocaml-ancient-devel(x86-64) = 0.9.0-1.fc11
  =
   ocaml-ancient = 0.9.0-1.fc11

* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* .cma, .cmi, .so, .so.owner, META files in the main package.
* .a, .cmxa, .cmx and .mli files are in the -devel subpackage.
* .cmo, .o and .ml files not included
* .so files have no rpath

APPROVED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list 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]