[Bug 326841] Review Request: kcbench-data - Kernel sources to be used by kcbench

[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: kcbench-data - Kernel sources to be used by kcbench


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=326841





------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx  2007-10-12 17:11 EST -------
Sorry for being so slow with this; I keep running out of time.

The rpmlint complaints are all OK; all the .c and .h files are the point of this
package, which isn't used to develop anything.

I do wonder about the necessity of packaging the Documentation directory if the
whole point is to provide a controlled set of kernel sources to compile.  I
guess it's only a few hundred files out of more than 22000 but it's not really
relevant to the purpose of this package.

One question I have is where the actual dependencies for compiling the kernel
source are going to come from.  This package has no dependency on make or the C
compiler, and it doesn't look like the kcbench package does, either.  Should
each of the data packages have dependencies on what they need in order to build?
 (They could have minimum gcc release requirements, for example, although I
doubt a Fedora release would ever violate them unless gcc 5.9 fails to compile
2.6.20 ten years from now.)

* source files match upstream:
   2c14ada1ac7d272e03b430d3a530d60fc9ec69cc8252382aa049afba7d2b8558  
   linux-2.6.20.tar.bz2
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* 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 has acceptable complaints.
? final dependencies might be incomplete
  kcbench-data-0.1-1.noarch.rpm
   kcbench-data = 0.1-1
  =
   kcbench
   kcbench-data-2.6.20 = 0.1-1

  kcbench-data-2.6.20-0.1-1.noarch.rpm
   kcbench-datafiles = 0.1-1
   kcbench-data-2.6.20 = 0.1-1
  =
   /bin/bash
   /bin/sh
   /usr/bin/env
   /usr/bin/perl
   /usr/bin/python
   kcbench-data = 0.1-1
   perl >= 1:5
   perl(File::Find)
   perl(strict)

* nothing to %check.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* acceptable content.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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]