[Bug 772284] Review Request: libnl3 - convenience library for kernel netlink API

[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=772284

Dan Horák <dan@xxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|needinfo?(dan@xxxxxxxx)     |

--- Comment #12 from Dan Horák <dan@xxxxxxxx> 2012-01-17 04:59:40 EST ---
formal review is here, see the notes explaining OK* and BAD statuses below:

OK source files match upstream:
     f7994bf67452e2c11fe55ce7f4caa18a4f23e37d  libnl-3.2.5.tar.gz
OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
OK license field matches the actual license.
OK license is open source-compatible (LGPLv2). License text included in
package.
OK latest version is being packaged.
OK BuildRequires are proper.
OK compiler flags are appropriate.
OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/i386).
OK debuginfo package looks complete.
OK* rpmlint is silent.
OK final provides and requires look sane.
N/A %check is present and all tests pass.
OK shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths with correct
scriptlets
BAD owns the directories it creates.
OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK no duplicates in %files.
OK file permissions are appropriate.
OK correct scriptlets present.
OK code, not content.
BAD documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK headers in devel subpackage
OK pkgconfig files in devel subpackage.
OK no libtool .la droppings.
OK not a GUI app.

- you could probably use --disable-static instead of --enable-static=no, but
it's more cosmetic issue
- rpmlint complains a bit
libnl3.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) netlink -> net link, net-link,
nestling
libnl3.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US netlink -> net link,
net-link, nestling
libnl3.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) netlink -> net link, net-link,
nestling
libnl3.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US netlink -> net link,
net-link, nestling
libnl3-cli.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) utils -> utile, utilizes,
utilize
libnl3-cli.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US utils -> utile,
utilizes, utilize
    => can be ignored

libnl3.src:117: W: macro-in-%changelog %{_lib}
libnl3.src:117: W: macro-in-%changelog %{_libdir}
libnl3.src:173: W: macro-in-%changelog %{_libdir}
    => will be resolved by dropping the old changelog

libnl3.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/libnl3-3.2.5/COPYING
libnl3-cli.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/libnl3-cli-3.2.5/COPYING
    => upstream should fix this

libnl3-devel.i686: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/libnl/cli/cls/cgroup.so cgroup.so.0.0.0
libnl3-devel.i686: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/libnl/cli/cls/basic.so
basic.so.0.0.0
libnl3-devel.i686: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/libnl/cli/qdisc/htb.so
htb.so.0.0.0
libnl3-devel.i686: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/libnl/cli/qdisc/bfifo.so bfifo.so.0.0.0
libnl3-devel.i686: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/libnl/cli/qdisc/pfifo.so pfifo.so.0.0.0
libnl3-devel.i686: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/libnl/cli/qdisc/blackhole.so blackhole.so.0.0.0
    => doesn't seem as a bug, but are those files libraries or dlopen()-ed
plugins? Shouldn't they be linked with -avoid-version libtool flag?

libnl3.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libnl-route-3.so.199.5.1
exit@GLIBC_2.0
libnl3-cli.i686: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libnl-cli-3.so.199.5.1
exit@GLIBC_2.0
    => needs a comment

libnl3-cli.i686: W: summary-not-capitalized C libnl3 command line interface
utils
    => could be reworded to "Command line interface utils for libnl3"

libnl3-cli.i686: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man8/nl-qdisc-add.8.gz
2: warning: macro `LO' not defined
libnl3-cli.i686: W: manual-page-warning
/usr/share/man/man8/nl-classid-lookup.8.gz 2: warning: macro `LO' not defined
libnl3-cli.i686: W: manual-page-warning
/usr/share/man/man8/nl-pktloc-lookup.8.gz 2: warning: macro `LO' not defined
    => upstream issue

libnl3-cli.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nl-class-list
libnl3-cli.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nl-class-delete
libnl3-cli.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nl-cls-add
libnl3-cli.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nl-class-add
libnl3-cli.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nl-cls-list
libnl3-cli.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nl-link-list
libnl3-cli.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nl-cls-delete
    => would be nice to have

- the directories under %{_libdir} (libnl, libnl/cli/...) are not owned by the
package although they should
- the documentation makes 99% of the devel subpackage and it should be packaged
separately

-- 
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]