[Bug 213180] Review Request: tcl-thread - Thread extension for Tcl

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Nov 2 23:04:58 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: tcl-thread - Thread extension for Tcl


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213180





------- Additional Comments From wart at kobold.org  2006-11-02 18:04 EST -------
GOOD
====
* Package and spec named appropriately:  The upstream name is the simply
  'thread', which is far too generic.  Following the examples for python
  and perl modules, the name tcl-thread is acceptable.
* Spec file is legible and in Am. English
* Source matches upstream:
  3c69b4a891590f23bb79a1fa98d879f7  thread2.6.5.tar.gz
* No unnecessary BuildRequires
* No locales
* No shared libraries in the default linker path; the shared library
  that is produced is loaded by Tcl via dlopen.
* RPM_BUILD_ROOT cleaned where appropriate
* Not relocatable
* No duplicate %files
* File permissions look ok
* No need for a -devel subpackage
* Not a gui program; no need for a .desktop file
* Package loads into Tcl as expected and passes its own test suite.
* Consistent use of macros
* Does not own any directories that it should not own.

MUSTFIX
=======
 * License does not match upstream.  Should be BSD.
 * License file 'license.terms' not included.
 * Add the README and ChangeLog files to %doc

 * Does not own all directories that it creates.  In %files, change
%{_libdir}/thread%{version}/*
to
%{_libdir}/thread%{version}

 * Does not build properly on x86_64 in mock.  The attached patch
   fixes the problem.

 * The dependency on gdbm is picked up automatically.  You can drop
   Requires: gdbm.

SHOULDFIX
=========
* Missing a %check section for running the unit tests.

-- 
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