[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[Bug 187932] Review Request: paraview - Parallel visualization application



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: paraview - Parallel visualization application


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187932





------- Additional Comments From pertusus free fr  2006-04-09 12:31 EST -------
I believe you are right about using the included VTK. In that case it is
unlikely that the included VTK will become too old, on the contrary it seems to
be newer than the released VTK.

* it would be nice to have a .desktop file

* rpmlint give some ignorable warnings: 
W: paraview-data no-documentation
W: paraview-demos no-documentation

rpmlint is also unhappy with the debuginfo package. There are lots of 'objdump
failed', that I don't know how to solve, but there are also some errors, because
lots of source files have the executable bit set. It could be possible to chmod
-x everything ending in .h .c .cxx. Could be done later, however.

* I would have chosed BSD-like for the licence, but Distributable is ok too.

* I don't know how much the -data and other packages are coupled. But if they
are the specific version release should be required, like
Requires:       %{name}-data = %{version}-%{release}

* right name, follow packaging guidelines
* don't distribute unowned directory
* other items are right

NEEDSWORK: there are many man pages distributed in the paraview-mpi package, and
some cmake files that I believe shouldn't be packaged, the man pages refer to
non existant header files.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]