[Bug 198691] Review Request: steghide - A Steganography Program
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Jul 21 04:13:45 UTC 2006
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: steghide - A Steganography Program
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198691
cweyl at alumni.drew.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu 2006-07-21 00:04 EST -------
Parag:
Good first pass at a review. Note that compiler warnings like that are
generally disregarded for the purposes of review, unless it's something
_serious_ or correctable on our end. But, that being said, when in doubt, note it.
The MUSTs are good places to start for reviews, as you've discovered... I
encourage you to look at the other templates people are using (or patently
stealing, like me <grin>). Keep it up, you're improving each time around.
Jochen:
I'd recommend addressing the rpmlint warning below as it's a lot of visual
spam otherwise, but it's not a blocker.
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license field matches the actual license.
+ license is open source-compatible. License text included in package.
+ source files match upstream:
5be490e24807d921045780fd8cc446b3 steghide-0.5.1.tar.gz
5be490e24807d921045780fd8cc446b3 steghide-0.5.1.tar.gz.srpm
+ latest version is being packaged.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ package builds in mock (5+devel/x86_64).
+ rpmlint is silent on binary package
O rpmlint issues warming on source package (ignorable)
W: steghide setup-not-quiet
+ final provides and requires are sane:
steghide-0.5.1-1.fc5.x86_64.rpm
== provides
steghide = 0.5.1-1.fc5
== requires
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libjpeg.so.62()(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit)
libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libmcrypt.so.4()(64bit)
libmhash.so.2()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.1)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit)
libz.so.1()(64bit)
+ no shared libraries are present.
+ package is not relocatable.
+ owns the directories it creates.
+ doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ %clean is present.
+ %check is present and all tests pass:
+ no scriptlets present.
+ code, not content.
+ documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
+ %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
+ no headers.
+ no pkgconfig files.
+ no libtool .la droppings.
+ not a GUI app.
+ not a web app.
APPROVED
--
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.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list