[Bug 226638] Merge Review: xorg-x11-filesystem

[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: Merge Review: xorg-x11-filesystem


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226638


fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx        |ajackson@xxxxxxxxxx
                 CC|                            |fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review-




------- Additional Comments From fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  2007-02-04 10:38 EST -------
* I'm a bit unsure about this package in general -- is it really still needed?
FC5 has modular X already, and we don't support from older releases anymore
iirc. RHEL5 should have this package, too, and RHEL6 probably should not need it
anymore, too.

* why doesn't this package simply own some of the other important directorys
like /usr/lib/xorg/modules/

* Stuff like "cat > "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/${UPGRADE_CMD}" <<'EOF'" is disliked; it
should live in a separate file that it included as source

* Quoting the spec
{{{
# NOTE: Do not replace these with _libdir or _includedir macros, they are
#       intentionally explicit.
}}}
Nice, the comment helps -- but it would help more if the reason why its
"intentionally explicit" would be mentioned ;-) Ohh, it's explained later in the
spec; Not importatn, but maybe mention in once at the top of the spec file
properly might be the best

* rpmlint:
rpmlint on ./xorg-x11-filesystem-7.1-2.fc7.noarch.rpm
W: xorg-x11-filesystem incoherent-version-in-changelog 7.1-2.fc6 7.1-2.fc7
-> simply avoid mention the disttag in the changelog

W: xorg-x11-filesystem invalid-license MIT/X11
-> Would be MIT, but what actualy is licenced under MIT/X11 ? 

W: xorg-x11-filesystem no-documentation
-> acceptable

E: xorg-x11-filesystem standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/lib/X11
-> owned by package "filesystem", so not needed

W: xorg-x11-filesystem dangerous-command-in-%pre rm

rpmlint on ./xorg-x11-filesystem-7.1-2.fc7.src.rpm
W: xorg-x11-filesystem invalid-license MIT/X11
-> see above

E: xorg-x11-filesystem hardcoded-library-path in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/X11"
E: xorg-x11-filesystem hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/X11
E: xorg-x11-filesystem hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/X11
E: xorg-x11-filesystem hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/X11
E: xorg-x11-filesystem hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/X11
E: xorg-x11-filesystem hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/X11
-> accpetable in this case

W: xorg-x11-filesystem no-%build-section
-> accpetable in this case

Stopping reviewing here for now until it becomes clear this is still needed

-- 
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]