[Bug 225660] Merge Review: crash

[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=225660


manuel wolfshant <wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro




--- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant <wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro>  2009-01-09 22:27:09 EDT ---
Created an attachment (id=328610)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=328610)
revised spec according to fedora guidelines

I've taken a look at the current version
(http://people.redhat.com/anderson/crash-4.0-7.6.src.rpm) and did a local mock
rebuild. I am attaching a slightly revised spec which fixes part of the
problems.

The major issues (I have not tried to fix any of these because I am not
familiar with the requirements of this special package) are that
1. the package uses it's own versions of several utilities/libs (at least gdb
and readline) which contradicts the guidelines. However, according to
http://people.redhat.com/anderson/crash_whitepaper/ this is intended.
2.the package builds a static binary. Once again, this is intended
3.fedora compile flags are completely ignored. This also seems to be intended,
each of the libraries is built with a different set of flags.


Easily fixable stuff (not done):
- SMP_FLAGS are not used (I did not know if it's OK to use them )
- the source files (included in -debuginfo) have the exec bit set, which makes
rpmlint unhappy
- license seems to be GPLv2+. A lot of files are GPL+, some are GPLv2+, some
have no license at all. A cleanup of those would be nice

Other problems (fixed)
- usage of forbidden tags (packager, vendor) or incorrect values (buildroot,
source0)
- some aesthetic warnings from rpmlint
- missing license file from the binary rpm
- there was no changelog. I have added one but it should be properly populated
- timestamps (for docs/man) were not preserved
- defattr was missing in %files

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