[Bug 225254] Merge Review: apr-util

[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: apr-util


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225254





------- Additional Comments From jeremy at hinegardner.org  2007-03-30 01:00 EST -------
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
Ok - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistent macro usage.
ISSUE (4) - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
a2e2e54d65e9eae961f7171335cf2550  rpmbuild/SOURCES/apr-util-1.2.8.tar.gz
a2e2e54d65e9eae961f7171335cf2550  reviews/apr-util/apr-util-1.2.8.tar.gz

ISSUE (6) - BuildRequires correct
OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
ISSUE (1) - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Doc subpackage needed/used.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
OK - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
OK - .so files in -devel subpackage.
OK - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
ISSUE (7) - .la files are removed.

OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
ISSUE (5) - rpmlint output.
OK - Should build in mock.
OK - Should have sane scriptlets.
OK - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
ISSUE (2) - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
ISSUE (3) - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)

Issues:

1. Build root is not one of the recommended options
    
    %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)

2. It is recommended to use %{?dist} in Release:

3. There is an outstanding bug for apr-util, but it may not apply to
   Fedora.

4. Conflicts: should not be used.  Perhaps Requires: subversion >=
   0.20.1-2 instead? 

5 rpmlint output

W: apr-util invalid-license Apache Software License 2.0
W: apr-util-debuginfo invalid-license Apache Software License 2.0
W: apr-util-devel invalid-license Apache Software License 2.0
W: apr-util-mysql invalid-license Apache Software License 2.0
W: apr-util-pgsql invalid-license Apache Software License 2.0

    probably false positives

E: apr-util use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR

    in %prep use cp ${SOURCE1} dbd instead of
    cp $RPM_SOURCE_DIR/apr_dbd_mysql.c dbd

W: apr-util-devel no-documentation
W: apr-util-mysql no-documentation
W: apr-util-pgsql no-documentation

    Is there any documentation to include?


6. Build Requires
    doxygen is in BuildRequires but it does not seem to be used in the
    build process.  Is a step missing in the build process to create the
    documentation and then put %doc for each of the -devel -mysql and
    -pgsql sub packages ?

7. .la files exist and must be removed


-- 
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.