[Bug 225306] Merge Review: avalon-logkit

[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: avalon-logkit


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225306


overholt at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review-              |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat.com  2007-02-09 16:26 EST -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > MUST:
> > X rpmlint on avalon-logkit srpm gives no output
> > 
> > W: avalon-logkit non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
> > 
> > Perhaps:  System Environment/Libraries ?
> > 
> 
> It seems acceptable to use Development/Libraries/Java as the Group field, please
> see:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2007-February/msg00070.html

Okay.

> > X package meets packaging guidelines.
> > 
> > . BuildRoot incorrect.  As per this:
> > 
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot
> > 
> > it should be:
> > 
> > %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
> > 
> 
> Fixed.

Great.

> > . do we need section free?
> > 
> 
> Got rid of it.

Sweet.

> > X specfile is legible
> > . do we still need the crazy gcj_support line?
> > 
> 
> Yes, please see:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226366#c5

Okay.

> > X source files match upstream
> > . I can't find the tarball.  Also, Source0 can be the actual URL ending with the
> > tar.gz.
> > 
> 
> Fixed Source0 URL.

Great.  The md5sums now match.

> > X BuildRequires are proper
> > . are things in coreutils (/bin/rm, /bin/ln) necessary in Requires(post{,un})?
> > 
> 
> Yes, please see:
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2007-February/msg00076.html

Yup, sounds good.

> > X package owns all directories and files
> > . why is the javadoc symlink not just made in %install and then added to the
> >   %file section?
> 
> Please see the second part of the following comment:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225928#c5

Okay.  I'd like to see this cleaned up but it isn't violating any rules so it's
fine.

> > SHOULD:
> > X package functions
> >   . I don't know how to test this package
> 
> I've built avalon-framework (which has avalon-logkit as a BuildRequire) and it
> builds fine.

Good.

> > X package builds in mock
> >   my mock setup doesn't seem to be working but I don't anticipate any problems
> >   here as the package currently builds fine in brew
> 
> I did a scratch build in brew with the new spec file and it builds fine.

Awesome.

APPROVED.  Thanks, Permaine :)

As per https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225928#c7 , please
ebuild this package in Brew and when I've confirmed that the updated package has
hit Rawhide, I'll close this bug as RAWHIDE.

-- 
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.