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