[Bug 475132] Review Request: usbmon - Front-end for in-kernel usbmon

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475132


Kevin Fenzi <kevin at tummy.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|177841                      |
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




--- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin at tummy.com>  2008-12-13 19:13:25 EDT ---
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name. 
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. 
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. 
OK - License (GPLv2)
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:
cbba81a5b47b811dafd897cd7bd72dee  usbmon-5.2.tar.gz
cbba81a5b47b811dafd897cd7bd72dee  usbmon-5.2.tar.gz.orig


See below - Package needs ExcludeArch
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. 
OK - Package has a correct %clean section. 
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content. 
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. 
OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install

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. 
OK - No rpmlint output. 
OK - final provides and requires are sane

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock. 
OK - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version

Issues: 

A few general comments, unrelated to the packaging and thus moot for the
review, 
but I thought I would mention them: 

- You have your upstream url as your people.redhat.com page. 
Perhaps it would be good to use a fedorahosted.org site for this? 
That way you get bug tracking/mailing lists/vcs repo, etc. 
See: https://fedorahosted.org/web/new

- You might add a note about the license version to the .c file. 
No big deal since it's mentioned other places and is clearly your intent, 
but just to be paranoid. ;) 

Now, on to issues about the package: 

1. I have no idea on the ExcludeArch. Does s390 have usb? 
In any case it's not a blocker here as Fedora doesn't have s390 as a primary
arch.
You might ask the s390 list?

I don't see any other blockers here, this is a very simple package, 
and is APPROVED. 

Go ahead and continue the process from
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Get_a_Fedora_Account
If you have any questions don't hesitate to contact me via bugzilla, email, 
or on irc (nirik on freenode).

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.