[Bug 225804] Merge Review: glib2

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: glib2


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225804


roozbeh at farsiweb.info changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|roozbeh at farsiweb.info       |mclasen at redhat.com
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review-




------- Additional Comments From roozbeh at farsiweb.info  2007-02-04 13:58 EST -------
OK, trying to restrict myself, these are the final rants. I also went over the
Packaging Guidelines. Summarizing the status of things as they stand, and I
believe they are all:

Blockers
--------
* The executable-sourced-scripts errors by rpmlint are definitely errors.
Reading the rpmlint source code it only checks two directories for such things,
/etc/bash_completion.d and /etc/profile.d. Bug here:
<http://rpmlint.zarb.org/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/ticket/17>. I guess Separate bugs need
to be filed for other packages that put execuatble files there.

* The two "Conflicts"es are fine, but should be documented. Quote from
<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Conflicts>: "Remember, whenever
you use Conflicts:, you are also required to include the reasoning in a comment
next to the Conflicts: entry, so that it will be abundantly clear why it needed
to exist."

* From <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines>: "MUST: A
package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a
directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that
directory." glib2 puts files in /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/. That means that it
should at least depend on gtk-doc that owns /usr/share/gtk-doc. The html
subdirectory is more problematic, but I think gtk-doc should be changed to own
it. Already mentioned in bug 225870.

* Please use the "-p" option of install for copying files to /etc/profile.d. See
<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps>

Possible improvements
---------------------
* I believe the summary lines should be a little different for each sub-package.
My raw suggestion is "developement files for glib2" and "static libaries for
glib2", but anything that makes the three a little different is fine. A user is
supposed to be able to distinguish the packages based on their description
sometimes. Same description doesn't help.

* Please mark %{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/* as documents. Just add a %doc at the
beginning of the line.

rpmlint output
--------------
E: glib2 executable-sourced-script /etc/profile.d/glib2.sh 0755
E: glib2 executable-sourced-script /etc/profile.d/glib2.csh 0755
E: glib2-devel only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
E: glib2-static devel-dependency glib2-devel
W: glib2-static no-documentation
W: glib2-static devel-file-in-non-devel-package /lib/libglib-2.0.a
W: glib2-static devel-file-in-non-devel-package /lib/libgobject-2.0.a
W: glib2-static devel-file-in-non-devel-package /lib/libgthread-2.0.a
W: glib2-static devel-file-in-non-devel-package /lib/libgmodule-2.0.a

All are fine except the executable-sourced-script ones, already mentioned above.


-- 
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.