[Bug 442342] Review Request: pnp4nagios - Nagios performance data analysis tool

[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: pnp4nagios - Nagios performance data analysis tool


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442342





------- Additional Comments From romal at gmx.de  2008-07-10 01:00 EST -------
OK - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
OK - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, 
OK - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
GPLv2 - MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license 
OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match 
OK - MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the 
OK - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.

Download; 5e57d50e2d895878b626497fd7b217b7  pnp-0.4.10.tar.gz
SRPM:     5e57d50e2d895878b626497fd7b217b7  pnp-0.4.10.tar.gz

OK - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms 
OK - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture
OK - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, 
Not relevant, no locales - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. 
no libs included - MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files
Not relevant - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager
must state this fact in the request for review,
OK - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
OK - MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
OK - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. 
OK - MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} 
OK - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, 
Code- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK- MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
OK - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
No header files included - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
No libs included - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
No pkcconfig - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability).
No libs included- MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix
No devel package- MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must
require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
OK - MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
No GUI - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a 
OK - MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Included - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
No translations- SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package
spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if
available.
Ok on 386 and X86_64 - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary
rpms on all supported architectures.
OK - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A
package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
No scriplets included - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be
sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity.
No Subpackages- SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the
base package using a fully versioned dependency.
No pkcconfig - SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their
usecase,
No file dependencies - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of
/etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which
provides the file instead of the file itself.

-- 
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.