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: prtconf - SPARC OpenPROM dump utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=252457 bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |rawhide tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |fedora-review? ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2008-01-18 15:48 EST ------- Completely forgot to make it back to this. It's kind of tough to do a review on an arch you don't have, but: prtconf.sparc: W: non-standard-group Utilities/System Not a problem. prtconf-debuginfo.sparc: E: empty-debuginfo-package Nothing at all there. The compiler isn't being called with the proper set of flags, and CFLAGS is overridden in the Makefile. prtconf.sparc: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.3-7 1.3-6.al3 Maybe Release: didn't get updated with the last change to the package? prtconf.sparc: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultrabook prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/cp1500 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultra450 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/e10000#2 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/e3000 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultra5 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ss1000 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultra2 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultra1 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultraAX prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ss2000 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultra30 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ss20 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ss4 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ss5 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ss2 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultra250 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/e5000 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ultrabook prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/je1 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ipx prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/s3gx prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/e10000#1 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ss10 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/e4000 prtconf.sparc: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/prtconf/examples/ss1000e I'm not sure what these are about. I'm pretty sure they shouldn't be executable, and they're probably only useful as documentation. (I'd just drop the "install examples/*" bit from %install and just stick "%doc examples" in the %files list. And the untrabook example might as well have a pass through sed. Some other bits: I'm not sure URL is useful; it just points me at the sunsite main page. The COPYING file needs to be included as %doc. I can't install or test this package so here's as much review as I can do: * source files match upstream: 28a9b9d0a680050e33b5ea54aede0f8fcedd51568cd23cd5f3d225fdb608c112 prtconf-1.3.tgz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * 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. X license text included in upstream tarball but is not in the package.. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (none) X compiler flags are not the recommended ones. * %clean is present. * package builds in koji (scratch build provided) X debuginfo package is not complete. X rpmlint has valid complaints * final dependencies are sane. * 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. X file permissions odd (executable examples) * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %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/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