[Bug 218678] Review Request: pybluez - python API for the bluez bluetooth stack
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Dec 26 23:32:50 UTC 2006
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: pybluez - python API for the bluez bluetooth stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218678
kevin at tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |kevin at tummy.com
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com 2006-12-26 18:32 EST -------
Hey Will.
I would be happy to move this review forward and look at sponsoring you.
Do you have any other packages ready to review right now? It helps to see a few
packages to know when someone knows the ropes and is ready to be sponsored.
Anyhow, here is a review of this package:
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License (GPL)
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
3e7e951ea4e8433f3b80ef8c14d99c28 pybluez-src-0.9.1.tar.gz
3e7e951ea4e8433f3b80ef8c14d99c28 pybluez-src-0.9.1.tar.gz.1
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
See below - No rpmlint output.
See below - final provides and requires are sane:
SHOULD Items:
OK - Should build in mock.
i386/x86_64 - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
Issues:
1. Why the:
BuildArch: i386 x86_64 ppc
line? Does it not work on other arches?
2. In build you have:
# Remove CFLAGS=... for noarch packages (unneeded)
CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" %{__python} setup.py build
why are you passing them in if you don't need them?
Perhaps that line should be:
%{__python} setup.py build
3. rpmlint says:
W: pybluez incoherent-version-in-changelog -0.9.1-2 0.9.1-2.fc7
There is a - in there that shouldn't be.
Also, you don't need to add dist tags normally to changelog versions.
W: pybluez doc-file-dependency
/usr/share/doc/pybluez-0.9.1/examples/bluezchat/bluezchat.py /usr/bin/python
The bluezchat.py example should be made mode 644 like all the other examples.
4. The package provides:
_bluetooth.so
Which is kinda ugly, but not a blocker I guess.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list