Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tcptraceroute - A traceroute implementation using TCP packets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239165 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-06-09 20:10 EST ------- This builds fine and rpmlint is quiet. According to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PreReleasePackages release should be 0.1.beta7%{?dist}. This is another package that links statically with libnet. Not that it has any choice, but this requires a trip through FESCo. Either that or the libnet maintainer needs to get whatever patches debian uses to build libnet dynamically. Review: * source files match upstream: aed5b163ed4886f04242b46005a6cb4876ef38ad72001a94facb62a99dc99c57 tcptraceroute-1.5beta7.tar.gz X package doesn't meet versioning guidelines for prerelease packages. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: tcptraceroute = 1.5-0.beta7.1.fc8 = libpcap.so.0.9()(64bit) * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. (Actually the documentation is nearly twice as large as the lone executable, but the package is only 142K.) * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. -- 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