[Bug 1245640] Review Request: msed - Tools to manage the activation and use of self encrypting drives

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1245640



--- Comment #2 from Charles R. Anderson <cra@xxxxxxx> ---
New build:

Spec URL: https://cra.fedorapeople.org/msed/msed.spec
SRPM URL:
https://cra.fedorapeople.org/msed/msed-0.23-0.5.beta.gite38a16d.fc21.src.rpm

(In reply to Till Hofmann from comment #1)
> Minor comments/questions after a first glance:
> 
> - Why do you create backups during patching?

Common practice to make it easy to use "gendiff" to maintain patches.

> - You use "buildconf x86_64" on ALL arch'es, are you sure this is intended?
> It certainly looks odd.

I added comments explaining this.  Upstream only provides x86_64 and i686 build
targets--we need to pick one of those, and override all the CFLAGS to build for
other arches anyway.

> - You can use a URL pointing to github as Source0 URL instead of using a
> local file, for details see [1] (although this probably won't work, see next
> comment).

Thanks, I like this method so I've adopted it.

> - It seems like you need to have the full git repository in order to specify
> the GIT_VERSION correctly. Couldn't you instead define the version when
> calling make (e.g. by defining additional CPPFLAGS)? I understand this would
> require some patching, but it seems like the cleaner solution.

I now patch GitVersion.sh using sed in the spec file and I've dropped the "git"
BR.

> - Are the patches generic or are these Fedora-specific patches? If they are
> generic, are they included upstream? Did you send them upstream?

All patches now have comments to explain their status.

rpmlint:

Checking: msed-0.23-0.5.beta.gite38a16d.fc24.x86_64.rpm
          msed-0.23-0.5.beta.gite38a16d.fc24.src.rpm
msed.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary linuxpba
msed.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary msed
msed.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US linuxpba -> Linux
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.

Upstream does not provide manual pages.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
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]