[Bug 443807] Review Request: PPTP support for NetworkManager

[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: PPTP support for NetworkManager
Alias: nm-pptp-review

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443807





------- Additional Comments From dan@xxxxxxxx  2008-04-24 06:07 EST -------
OK	source files match upstream:
	    archives have no differences when using the decribed steps
OK	package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
BAD	specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
OK	dist tag is present.
OK	build root is correct.
OK	license field matches the actual license.
OK	license is open source-compatible (GPLv2+). License text included in package.
OK	latest version is being packaged.
BAD	BuildRequires are proper.
OK	compiler flags are appropriate.
OK	%clean is present.
OK	package builds in mock (CentOS-5/x86_64).
OK	debuginfo package looks complete.
BAD	rpmlint is silent.
OK	final provides and requires look sane.
N/A	%check is present and all tests pass.
OK	no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
OK	owns the directories it creates.
OK	doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK	no duplicates in %files.
OK	file permissions are appropriate.
BAD	scriptlets present.
OK	code, not content.
OK	documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK	%docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK	no headers.
OK	no pkgconfig files.
OK	no libtool .la droppings.
OK	is a GUI app, desktop file is installed correctly


comments:
- mixed usage of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot} in %install section
- you should remove BR: autoconf automake
- files in %{_sysconfdir} should be marked as %config
- NetworkManager-pptp.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/libnm-pptp-properties.so
    is libnm-pptp-properties a plugin or real library? plugins should have
-avoid-version in their LDFLAGS
- remove ldconfig calls from the scriptlets (depends on ^)
- remove R(post,postun): /sbin/ldconfig - added automagically when ldconfig is
used in scriptlets

-- 
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]