[Bug 221717] Review Request: agg - C++ rendering framework, move from core to shared

[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=221717


Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




--- Comment #28 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2009-01-15 23:07:08 EDT ---
Any update?  It would really nice to get rid of this ancient review ticket. 
Actually, I think I'll just go ahead and do a full review.

I was about to complain about a missing pkgconfig dependency for the -devel
package, but then noted that rpm automatically generates a /usr/bin/pkg-config
dependency.  That seems to solve the issue, although I'm not quite sure where
the dependency comes from.

So really it's just the rpmlint complaints above that could use fixing.


* source files match upstream (verified manually).
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summaries are OK.
* descriptions are OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* debuginfo package looks complete.
X rpmlint has some valid complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane:
  agg-2.5-6.fc11.x86_64.rpm
   libagg.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggfontfreetype.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggplatformX11.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggplatformsdl.so.2()(64bit)
   agg = 2.5-6.fc11
   agg(x86-64) = 2.5-6.fc11
  =
   /sbin/ldconfig
   libSDL-1.2.so.0()(64bit)
   libX11.so.6()(64bit)
   libagg.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggfontfreetype.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggplatformX11.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggplatformsdl.so.2()(64bit)
   libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
   libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
   libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
   libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
   libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
   libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit)

  agg-devel-2.5-6.fc11.x86_64.rpm
   pkgconfig(libagg) = 2.5.0
   agg-devel = 2.5-6.fc11
   agg-devel(x86-64) = 2.5-6.fc11
  =
   /usr/bin/pkg-config
   agg = 2.5-6.fc11
   automake
   freetype-devel
   libagg.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggfontfreetype.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggplatformX11.so.2()(64bit)
   libaggplatformsdl.so.2()(64bit)
   pkgconfig(freetype2)

* shared libraries present.
   ldconfig called properly
   unversioned .so links are in the -devel package.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files.
* scriptlets are OK (ldconfig).
* 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.
* pkgconfig files present; pkgconfig dependency is there (via 
   /usr/bin/pkg-config auto-dep).
* 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 the QA contact for the bug.