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: bongo - An easy-to-use mail and calendar system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428925 ------- Additional Comments From peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-02-22 17:59 EST ------- Sorry about the rather excessive tardiness of this review. Real Life can sometimes be a bit annoying. :( Anyway, here we go! Formal review of bongo-0.3.1-2: === GOOD === + Package naming/version is OK. Spec file is appropriately named ("%{name}.spec"). + License (GPLv2) is acceptable for Fedora and matches that of the code. + rpmlint is silent on the source RPM + Builds successfully in mock (F8/x86_64 and devel/x86_64) + Final file and directory ownership is OK, with no duplicates and appropriate %defattr lines. + BuildRoot is OK, and is properly removed as the first step in %install and as the only step in %clean. + Final requires/provides are sane. + Summary and %description are good. The spec is legible and written in American English. + File encodings are OK. + Compiler flags are honored; and parallel make is used. + -debuginfo packages seem OK. + No static libraries or libtool archives present. + Binaries contain no RPATH kludges. + Macro usage is consistent. + Locale files handled appropriately (via %find_lang). + Timestamps look OK. + Scriplets are OK, including user/group creation in %pre and /sbin/ldconfig invocations on %post/%postun for the installed shared libraries. + Web app data is properly placed into /usr/share/bongo. + Package does not seem to conflict with other Fedora stuff. + Properly handles installation of Python module and scripts via %python_sitearch and %python_sitelib. + License is included in the package (COPYING). + Sources match those of upstream: 9e841f0e31667be668d023cc8586a943 bongo-0.3.1-srpm.tar.bz2 9e841f0e31667be668d023cc8586a943 bongo-0.3.1-upstream.tar.bz2 + Package contains permissible code. + Documentation (%doc) does not affect runtime of the program. + Header files, pkgconfig data, and unversioned library symlinkes are in a -devel subpackage as required. It has proper dependencies on the main package and pkgconfig. + All filenames are valid UTF-8 === NEEDS WORK === X: Duplicate BuildRequires: libgcrypt-devel (pulled in by gnutls-devel) X: rpmlint complains a lot on the built binary packages: > bongo.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/bongo/logs.conf Please mark all configuration files (usually in /etc) with %config(noreplace) so that local changes do not get overridden on package upgrades, etc. (Wiki: Packaging/Guidelines, "Configuration files") The other complaints are all false positives. > bongo-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation This is fine. All the documentation is included within the main package. > bongo-devel.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/bongo-auth/libauthsqlite3.so libauthsqlite3.so.0.0.0 > bongo-devel.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/bongo-auth/libauthodbc.so libauthodbc.so.0.0.0 > bongo-devel.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/bongo-auth/libauthldap.so libauthldap.so.0.0.0 These also are ignorable, as they are just the unversioned symlinks to the libraries in the same directory. > bongo-devel.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib Again, also ignorable. The only stuff in %{_libdir} is the pkgconfig data and the unversioned symlinks. X: It includes an internal copy of MochiKit (bongo-0.3.1/src/www/js/lib/MochiKit). If possible, please make Bongo use the system copy, since it's available as a package in Fedora. X: It also bundles a copy of libical. Now that it is in Fedora (bug 426698), please build against a system copy if possible. X: ABOUT-NLS is an automatically gettext-generated file; we probably don't need to include that as %doc in the final build. === MINOR === (1) rpmlint complains about executable source files in the debuginfo: > bongo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bongo-0.3.1/src/agents/avirus/stream.c > bongo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bongo-0.3.1/src/agents/avirus/mime.c > bongo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bongo-0.3.1/src/agents/avirus/avirus.h > bongo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bongo-0.3.1/src/agents/avirus/avirus.c > bongo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bongo-0.3.1/src/agents/smtp/smtpd.h > bongo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bongo-0.3.1/src/agents/imap/imapd.h > bongo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bongo-0.3.1/src/agents/generic/generic.c > bongo-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/bongo-0.3.1/src/libs/python/libbongo/bongoutil.c These can probably all be fixed with some chmod-fu in the %setup section. Not a huge issue. === NOT APPLICABLE === * Package is not relocatable. * No large documentation; no -doc subpackage is necessary. * Not a GUI package, .desktop file handling not necessary. -- 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