[Bug 527488] Review Request: drbd - drbd tools

[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=527488





--- Comment #23 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto <fdinitto at redhat.com>  2009-10-15 00:15:36 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> 
> >   * It contains unnecessary BuildRequires
> 
> Udev is a valid build dependency (we check the udev version number via udevadm
> or udevinfo, depending on what's available, and install different udev rules).
> So is flex. Should we just remove gcc?

You can either leave it or remove it. gcc is guaranteed to be installed in the
build environment. It's not a blocker either way.

> > - The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
> > provided in the spec URL: NOK, cannot verify. URL doesn't match.
> 
> Full URL is now in the spec. Non-matching upstream source is a chicken-and-egg
> problem; we are currently redoing our build setup significantly to comply with
> this very review process.

Ok, it is nice to see such commitment from upstream. Once this review is
completed and spec file approved, please post an extra final srpm to match the
tarball release.

> > - %build doesn't respect smpflags
> 
> Done for now, requires a bit more testing on our part though.

Remember this is not mandatory. If upstream does not support smpflags, just
note it in the spec file.

> > - the -rgmanager variant conflicts with resource-agents. We will discuss this
> > specific detail between upstreams tho. It's only partially relevant for this
> > review as the package itself is and we will address it in cooperation with
> > cluster/resource-agents people.
> 
> Building drbd-rgmanager is now disabled by default. When a user chooses to
> enable this while re-packaging, it generates a conflict against rgmanager >=
> 3.0.1 (which was the rgmanager release during which the drbd agent got merged).
> I repeat, that Conflict tag does not apply when built with a default
> configuration.

Ok perfect...

the spec file is still a bit difficult to read, but this is just from my PoV,
otherwise it looks sane and adhere with Policy.

2 small notes on the packages that are not built by default (so no blockers,
just cleanup):

%package km-%{krelver}
Requires: %{name}-utils = %{version}, /sbin/depmod

file dependencies are generally to be avoided.

Conflicts: rgmanager >= 3.0.1

You want to this to be resource-agents. rgmanager package doesn't ship agents
anymore in Fedora.

I am in the process of testing the packages now for runtime issues as required
by the checklist. Unless there are issues here, the packaging looks OK.

-- 
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.