[Bug 433418] Review Request: librdmacm - Userspace RDMA Connection Manager

[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: librdmacm - Userspace RDMA Connection Manager


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433418





------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx  2008-02-21 15:56 EST -------
OK, rawhide unbroke and I finally managed to get my local mirror updated.  So
it's clear, I'm reviewing the package with the libiverbs-devel dependency
included.

This package includes a static libarary.  That's OK (it's discouraged but
still left to the maintainer's discretion) but we have a few guidelines to
follow.  Specifically, the static library needs to be in a separate -static
package.  See the "Packaging Static Libraries" section of
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines for more info.

* source files match upstream:
   6ce541b0de7752d87782901ffe45a2035eb499a548f80a278e8ce5102d032148
   librdmacm-1.0.6.tar.gz
* 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.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
  librdmacm-1.0.6-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm
   librdmacm.so.1()(64bit)
   librdmacm.so.1(RDMACM_1.0)(64bit)
   librdmacm = 1.0.6-1.fc9
  =
   /sbin/ldconfig
   libibverbs.so.1()(64bit)
   libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.0)(64bit)
   libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.1)(64bit)
   librdmacm.so.1()(64bit)

  librdmacm-devel-1.0.6-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm
   librdmacm-devel = 1.0.6-1.fc9
  =
   /usr/include/infiniband/verbs.h
   librdmacm = 1.0.6-1.fc9
   librdmacm.so.1()(64bit)

  librdmacm-utils-1.0.6-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm
   librdmacm-utils = 1.0.6-1.fc9
  =
   libibverbs.so.1()(64bit)
   libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.0)(64bit)
   libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.1)(64bit)
   librdmacm = 1.0.6-1.fc9
   librdmacm.so.1()(64bit)
   librdmacm.so.1(RDMACM_1.0)(64bit)

* %check is not present because there's no updates.  I have no idea how to
  actually test this, although I did run the installed binaries and verified
  that they either printed help messages or complained about lack of
  infiniband hardware.
* shared libraries installed; ldconfig called properly.
* unversioned so files are in the -devel package.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* scriptlets are OK (ldconfig).
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* headers are in the -devel package.
* no pkgconfig files.
X static libraries are present but not in a -static package.
* 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

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