[Bug 250150] Review Request: rarian - a replacement for scrollkeeper

[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: Review Request: rarian - a replacement for scrollkeeper


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=250150





------- Additional Comments From mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx  2007-08-01 13:01 EST -------
rpmlint output:

[mclasen@dhcp83-186 Desktop]$ rpmlint rarian-0.5.6-1.fc8.i386.rpm 
E: rarian zero-length /usr/share/doc/rarian-0.5.6/AUTHORS

This one should be fixed upstream, I guess. I poked Don.
 
E: rarian explicit-lib-dependency libxslt

This is ok, because it is actually requiring /usr/bin/xsltproc here
Might want to add a comment next to the Requires: to explain that

W: rarian obsolete-not-provided scrollkeeper

I think the way you handle the Obsoletes/Provides here makes sense.

 rpmlint rarian-devel-0.5.6-1.fc8.i386.rpm 
W: rarian-devel no-documentation

Ignorable

 rpmlint rarian-compat-0.5.6-1.fc8.i386.rpm 
W: rarian-compat no-documentation

Ignorable

W: rarian-compat devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/rarian-sk-config

rpmlint is just wrong here

W: rarian-compat one-line-command-in-%post /usr/bin/rarian-sk-update

I think that is fine, and using -p here would be pretty odd


Detailed review:

package name: ok
spec file name: ok
packaging guidelines: ok
license: ok
license field: 
  - I think the -compat package should have a License: GPL,
    since the utils are GPL, not LGPL
  - if you want to preemptively adopt the new license field rules, the
    license tags should be LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+, respectively
license file: should include COPYING.LIB and COPYING.UTILS 
spec language: ok
spec legibility: ok
upstream sources: ok
buildable: ok
excludearch: n/a
build deps: ok
ldconfig: ok
relocatable: n/a
directory ownership: ok
file list dupes: ok
file permissions: ok
%clean: ok
macro use: ok
content: permissible
large docs: n/a
%doc: ok
headers: ok
static libs: n/a
pc files: ok
shared lib symlinks: ok
devel package: ok
la files: ok
gui apps: n/a
file ownership: ok
%install ok
utf8 filenames: ok

-- 
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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]