[Bug 648053] Review Request: libMicro - Portable micro-benchmarks for various system and library calls

[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=648053

Jon Ciesla <limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx
         AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla <limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2011-06-30 11:27:52 EDT ---
- rpmlint checks return:

libMicro.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/download/Project+libmicro/Source+Archives/libmicro-0.4.0.tar.gz
<urlopen error [Errno 104] Connection reset by peer>
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

libMicro.src: W: invalid-url URL:
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+libmicro/ <urlopen error [Errno
104] Connection reset by peer>
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

Is this upstream still valid?

libMicro.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary multiview
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.

libMicro.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bench
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.

If these exist, include them.

Other than that and the awk spelling, it's quiet.

??? package meets naming guidelines    If upstream is libmicro, why libMicro?
OK package meets packaging guidelines
OK license ( ) OK, text in %doc, matches source
OK spec file legible, in am. english
See above, can't check! source matches upstream
OK on x86_64 package compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
OK no locales
OK not relocatable
OK owns all directories that it creates
OK no duplicate files
OK permissions ok
OK %clean ok
OK macro use consistent
OK code, not content
OK no need for -docs
OK nothing in %doc affects runtime
OK no need for .desktop file 

Mock build to chck BRs in progress.

-- 
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.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review


[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]