[Bug 226135] Merge Review: memtest86+
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat Feb 3 21:22:15 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: Merge Review: memtest86+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226135
ruben at rubenkerkhof.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|ruben at rubenkerkhof.com |wtogami at redhat.com
CC| |ruben at rubenkerkhof.com
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review-
------- Additional Comments From ruben at rubenkerkhof.com 2007-02-03 16:22 EST -------
Hi Warren,
Review for release 4.1:
* RPM name is OK
* Source memtest86+-1.65.tar.gz is the same as upstream
* Builds fine in mock
* File list looks OK
Needs work:
* BuildRoot should be %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
(wiki: PackagingGuidelines#BuildRoot)
* Missing SMP flags. If it doesn't build with it, please add a comment
(wiki: PackagingGuidelines#parallelmake)
* Spec file: some paths are not replaced with RPM macros
(wiki: QAChecklist item 7)
* The package should contain the text of the license
(wiki: Packaging/ReviewGuidelines)
Notes:
* Please use {?dist} in Release tag
* Is the Obsoletes: memtest86 still necessary?
Rpmlint is not silent:
Source RPM:
W: memtest86+ strange-permission new-memtest-pkg 0775
W: memtest86+ strange-permission memtest-setup 0775
W: memtest86+ unversioned-explicit-obsoletes memtest86
W: memtest86+ macro-in-%changelog version
rpmlint of memtest86+:
E: memtest86+ obsolete-not-provided memtest86
E: memtest86+ no-binary
W: memtest86+ wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/memtest86+-1.65/README
--
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