[Bug 209511] Review Request: gnbd - global network block device

[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: gnbd - global network block device


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209511


bjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxx changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778, 177841
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From bjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxx  2006-12-08 06:53 EST -------
I don't see you in the owners list, so I can only provide you an unofficial
review.  I'm flipping the FE-NEEDSPONSOR blocker on for you too, since you will
have to have a sponsor do an official review.

rpmlint on all packages is silent.
mock-build on FC6 is successful


Must items:
      - MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.

Include COPYING file in %doc

      - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.

I have not been able to verify this - Source0 should be a URL that points to the
donwloadable file.

      - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed
in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work
on that architecture. The bug number should then be placed in a comment, next to
the corresponding ExcludeArch line. New packages will not have bugzilla entries
during the review process, so they should put this description in the comment
until the package is approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the
long explanation with the bug number. (Extras Only) The bug should be marked as
blocking one (or more) of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues:
[WWW] FE-ExcludeArch-x86, [WWW] FE-ExcludeArch-x64, [WWW] FE-ExcludeArch-ppc

Document why ExclusiveArch is used.

      - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the
macros section of Packaging Guidelines.

Your macro use is consistent.  However, I would suggest replacing "./configure
--mandir=%{_mandir} --libdir=%{_libdir}" with "%{configure}"



-- 
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]