[Bug 225235] Merge Review: a2ps

[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 report.

Summary: Merge Review: a2ps


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225235


kevin at tummy.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|kevin at tummy.com             |twaugh at redhat.com
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review-




------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com  2007-02-03 11:37 EST -------
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
See Below - 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:
0c8e0c31b08c14f7a7198ce967eb3281  a2ps-4.13b.tar.gz
0c8e0c31b08c14f7a7198ce967eb3281  a2ps-4.13b.tar.gz.1
fee1456d0e6e94af4fc5b5a1bb9687b7  i18n-fonts-0.1.tar.gz
fee1456d0e6e94af4fc5b5a1bb9687b7  i18n-fonts-0.1.tar.gz
See below - Package needs ExcludeArch
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
See below - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
See below - .a/.la files are removed.

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.
OK - final provides and requires are sane:

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock.
OK - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should function as described.
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
 - check for outstanding bugs on package.

Issues:

1. You use RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot}. Would be good to stick to one style?

2. Is there a bug filed for the
# Temp exclude on ppc64 as no emacs there right now
ExcludeArch: ppc64

3. Should fix the buildroot to the standard.

4. Should the .a .la files be shipped?
I suppose if there is a devel package, the .a might be usefull.

5. Our good friend rpmlint says:

E: a2ps-debuginfo tag-not-utf8 %changelog

Not sure where the non utf8 in the changelog is... do you see it?

E: a2ps-debuginfo script-without-shebang /usr/src/debug/a2ps-4.13/lib/basename.c
E: a2ps-debuginfo script-without-shebang /usr/src/debug/a2ps-4.13/lib/xmalloc.c

Permissions wrong on those source files?

W: a2ps summary-ended-with-dot Converts text and other types of files to
PostScript(TM).

Don't end summary with .

E: a2ps tag-not-utf8 %changelog
E: a2ps non-utf8-spec-file a2ps.spec

Ah, the entire spec seems to be non utf8...

W: a2ps prereq-use sed, coreutils


W: a2ps unversioned-explicit-obsoletes a2ps-i18n
W: a2ps unversioned-explicit-provides a2ps-i18n

Perhaps should have versions where that was obsoleted and provide the next version?
Of course that may have been so long ago that we can just remove these now.

W: a2ps macro-in-%changelog files

Thats in one of the very first changelogs from 1998:
- narrower range of %files splats.

W: a2ps mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 169, tab: line 211)

Pick tabs or spaces for cleanness?

E: a2ps file-in-usr-marked-as-conffile /usr/share/a2ps/afm/fonts.map

This looks like it can be ignored.

W: a2ps devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/liba2ps.a

Should be removed or moved to devel.

W: a2ps file-not-utf8 /usr/share/info/a2ps.info.gz

Need to run iconv on the info file before install?

W: a2ps devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/liba2ps.h

Should be removed or moved to devel.

W: a2ps dangerous-command-in-%post mv

Could the ./make_fonts_map.sh be modified to handle the moving the new maps file in
place logic?

6. Instead of 'exit 0' at the end of the scriptlets, perhaps add '|| :'
to the scriplets? Although it's not clear if thats cleaner.

7. You are missing:
Requires(post): /sbin/install-info
Requires(preun): /sbin/install-info

8. I assume upstream is dead and you can't get any patches pushed up?

9. 3 outstanding bugs, might look at that, especially the hebrew support 
and splitting -devel package.


-- 
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.