[Bug 506939] Review Request: dracut - a generic initramfs generator

[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=506939


Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |notting@xxxxxxxxxx
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




--- Comment #3 from Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx>  2009-06-19 11:03:55 EDT ---
- Package meets naming and packaging guidelines - OK
- Spec file matches base package name. - OK
- Spec has consistant macro usage. - OK
- Meets Packaging Guidelines. - OK
- License - GPLv2+
- License field in spec matches - ***

*** The license in the code is GPLv2 or later; the spec tag should be GPLv2+.
    It's also not present in most of the shell snippets; unsure what the
requirements are there.

- License file included in package - OK
- Spec in American English - ***

generic package description:
This package requires everything, which is needed to build a generic
all purpose initramfs.

Should probably be 'everything that is needed', without the comma.

- Spec is legible. - OK
- Sources match upstream md5sum: -  a6cbc2b0c1dbdec0b37a6ecfadf0a33c1f2e1122 -
OK

- Package needs ExcludeArch - ***

*** The arch/noarch switching seems a bit odd. Can we just get a new util-linux
in so we don't need this?

- BuildRequires correct - OK 
- Spec handles locales/find_lang - N/A
- Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. - OK
- Package has a correct %clean section. - OK
- Package has correct buildroot - OK
- Package is code or permissible content. - OK
- Doc subpackage needed/used. - N/A
- Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - OK
- Handles devel libs/ldconfig/pkg-config/etc. correctly - N/A


- Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. - OK (tested x86_64
building noarch, x86_64 building x86_64)
- Package has no duplicate files in %files. - OK
- Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. - OK
- Package owns all the directories it creates. - OK
- No rpmlint output. - OK
- final provides and requires are sane: - ***

The 'generic' package really should be some sort of Suggests/Enhances on the
main package. Alas, we can't do that yet. (Requiring to pull in nbd seems
wrong.)

That being said, if we don't have some sort of requirements on lvm2, raid, etc.
tools in the main package, the ordering won't be right on kernel installs, and
it will try to build a non-generic initramfs when the tools haven't yet been
installed that may be needed for that system. This needs solved before we ship
it.

SHOULD Items:

- Should build in mock. - OK (see above)
- Should build on all supported archs - didn't try
- Should function as described. - didn't try
- Should have sane scriptlets. - N/A
- Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. -
OK
- Should have dist tag - OK
- Should package latest version - OK

Other notes:
- dracut modules live in /usr. Do we need to be able to rebuild the initramfs
when /usr isn't present?

-- 
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]