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: yum-cron - get yum updates via a cron job https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=244894 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-07-29 15:52 EST ------- OK, this is a special package, since it's just a collection of crontab files. We actually have guidelines for how to deal with this; see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL (the "We Are Upstream" section). I note that you're not using the dist tag. This isn't a requirement (and for a package like this which shouldn't need changes between distro versions it's completely acceptable), but I want to make sure you understand how you'll need to keep ordering consistent. I would use "BuildArch" instead of "BuildArchitectures", but that's personal preference. You have no dependencies for your scriptlets. For example, if you call /sbin/chkconfig in %post, you need Requires(post): /sbin/chkconfig. So you'll need at least these: Requires(post): /sbin/chkconfig Requires(preun): /sbin/chkconfig Requires(preun): /sbin/service Requires(postun): /sbin/service See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets. Conversely, you don't need /sbin/chkconfig and /sbin/service in your Requires: list, because they aren't actually called by the files installed as part of this package. The scriptlets themselves have a few issues. I guess it's OK to append to /dev/null, although it does look a bit odd. But you also need to redirect STDERR (with 2>&1). Otherwise they look OK. There's a bunch of stuff going with init scripts which frankly I don't yet understand. I don't think the init script in this package conforms. There's some information at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FCNewInit/Initscripts but there are still a bunch of unanswered questions and frankly I'm not going to block this package based on what's in that document. So there are a few minor things to fix up. Do those and apply for cvsextras access and I'll sponsor you. Review: X This package is the upstream, but this is not explained in the spec. * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. X dist tag is not present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * BuildRequires are proper (none) * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * rpmlint is silent. X final provides and requires: config(yum-cron) = 0.2-4 yum-cron = 0.2-4 = /bin/bash /bin/sh X /sbin/chkconfig X /sbin/service config(yum-cron) = 0.2-4 crontabs vixie-cron yum /sbin/chkconfig and /sbin/service should not be in the runtine dependency list. * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. There's plenty of evidence of successful testing in this review ticket. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. X scriptlets are completely missing dependencies. X scriptlets should redirect STDERR but otherwise look OK. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review