[Bug 432228] Review Request: nettle - A low-level cryptographic library

[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: Review Request: nettle - A low-level cryptographic library


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432228





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-02-16 18:06 EST -------
Builds fine and rpmlint is silent.

I believe the license is LGPLv2+, not GPLv2+ as you have.

There's no reason to have a build dependency on glibc-common; it's installed
by default.  I guess it doesn't hurt anything to have it there, though.

For the -devel description, it helps to say something about the package
including headers needed to compile programs using nettle.

I see you deleted the static library, but I wonder if that actually leaves any
point to this package.  After all, what use are the headers if there's nothing
to link against?  If all you have left are the three executables then I don't
think you can properly call this a library.

There's a test suite in the package which is easy to run, so this needs to be
done.  Just put "make check" in a %check section.

All of the documentation is duplicated between the main and -devel packages.
You need to decide which files are useful for development and which (like the
license) are needed in the main package.  But there's no point in installing
everything twice. 

* source files match upstream:
   d6e540bf4acc857a3b09580e7f61822d352ee83c119579bf7333f0a785f7d9ac  
   nettle-1.15.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
X license field does not match the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (glibc-common is redundant)
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
  nettle-1.15-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm
   nettle = 1.15-1.fc9
  =
   /bin/sh
   /sbin/install-info
   libgmp.so.3()(64bit)

  nettle-devel-1.15-1.fc9.x86_64.rpm
   nettle-devel = 1.15-1.fc9
  =
   nettle = 1.15-1.fc9

X %check is not present, but a test suite is present.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
X Many duplicated files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* scriptlets are OK (install-info)
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* headers are in the -devel package.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.


-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.