[Bug 201417] Review Request: alleyoop : Graphical front-end to the Valgrind memory checker for x86

[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 report.

Summary: Review Request: alleyoop : Graphical front-end to the Valgrind memory checker for x86


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201417


kevin@xxxxxxxxx changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |kevin@xxxxxxxxx
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From kevin@xxxxxxxxx  2006-10-01 19:15 EST -------
OK - Package name
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License(GPL)
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
b3a4703f60448c30122ca55fd00d1c0f  alleyoop-0.9.3.tar.gz
b3a4703f60448c30122ca55fd00d1c0f  alleyoop-0.9.3.tar.gz.1
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.     
OK - Package needs ExcludeArch
See below - BuildRequires correct
OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
see below - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
See below - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
See below - No rpmlint output. 

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should include License or ask upstream to include it.
See below - Should build in mock.

Issues:

1. The desktop file has "Version=0.9.0". Should that be "Version=0.9.3" ?

2. You are using %makeinstall. Can you switch to 'make DESTDIR=..." ?
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-
fcaf3e6fcbd51194a5d0dbcfbdd2fcb7791dd002

3. Why %defattr(-,root,root,0755) instead of just %defattr(-,root,root,-).
Do some of the installed dirs get the wrong permissions?

4. Your desktop install should add:
--add-category X-Fedora

5. Doesn't build in mock. I get this at the end of build.log:

configure: error: *** libiberty required to build Alleyoop.
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.34937 (%build)

Missing BuildRequires: binutils-devel?

6. Adding the BuildRequires from point 5, the package builds and
rpmlint says:

W: alleyoop conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/gconf/schemas/alleyoop.schemas

Should this be marked (noreplace)?

W: alleyoop macro-in-%changelog description
W: alleyoop macro-in-%changelog postun

In changelog's you need to use %% to refer to a macro, or rpm will expand them.


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

_______________________________________________
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]