[Bug 812758] Review Request: trader - Star Traders, a simple game of interstellar trading

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=812758

Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?

--- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> ---
This is cool.  The spec is... a bit overblown.  To be honest, I'd edit out the
comments and the excessive macro-ization to get a spec that's very readable and
only 32 lines (excluding the changelog).  In particular your macroization of
Release: will interfere with our automatic rebuild stuff.

In any case, this builds fine and rpmlint is silent.

BuildRoot: is unnecessary in Fedora, as is the %clean section and the %defattr
in the %files section.

Your source bundles gnulib. That is permitted according to policy but it is
required that you include Provides: bundled(gnulib). 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Packages_granted_exceptions

Is the dependency on gperf necessary?  I can't see anywhere in the build where
gperf is called, and when I build without it the package doesn't appear any
different.

I'll run through the rest of my checklist.
* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
  b91e74b0fc5eee7dc61ca2d02e2bf04c64ac1c71bf858b5858fc408bfe9ad33a
   trader-7.4.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
X specfile is is a bit messy and has excessive macroization.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
? BuildRequires has extra gperf.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
X final provides and requires missing bundled(gnulib):

   trader = 7.4-1.fc18
   trader(x86-64) = 7.4-1.fc18
  =
   libncursesw.so.5()(64bit)  
   libtinfo.so.5()(64bit)  

* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  Manually tests OK.
X bundles gnulib without indicating such.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

-- 
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]