[Bug 235236] Review Request: vblade - Virtual EtherDrive (R) blade daemon

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Apr 8 18:16:58 UTC 2007


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: vblade - Virtual EtherDrive (R) blade daemon
Alias: vblade

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235236





------- Additional Comments From cweyl at alumni.drew.edu  2007-04-08 14:16 EST -------
There is a contrib directory -- but as it's a source patch, it's probably not
something to stick in %doc.  Not that it is, I'm just saying. :)

+ source files match upstream:
c5c7ed7b859d6d74575dd9facd82e2a1  vblade-14.tgz
c5c7ed7b859d6d74575dd9facd82e2a1  rpms/vblade/vblade-14.tgz
+ package meets naming and versioning 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. (GPL) License text included.
+ latest version is being packaged.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ compiler flags are appropriate (as tweaked :) )
+ %clean is present.
+ package installs properly
+ debuginfo package looks complete.
+ rpmlint is silent.
+ final provides and requires are sane:
** vblade-14-2.fc6.x86_64.rpm
== rpmlint
== provides
config(vblade) = 14-2.fc6
vblade = 14-2.fc6
== requires
/bin/sh  
/sbin/chkconfig  
/sbin/service  
config(vblade) = 14-2.fc6
libc.so.6()(64bit)  
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)  
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit)  
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)  
rtld(GNU_HASH)  
** vblade-debuginfo-14-2.fc6.x86_64.rpm
== rpmlint
== provides
vblade-debuginfo = 14-2.fc6
== requires
O no %check -- but no tests either.
+ no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
+ owns the directories it creates.
+ doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ scriptlets look sane.
+ 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.

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