[Bug 239165] Review Request: tcptraceroute - A traceroute implementation using TCP packets

[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: Review Request: tcptraceroute - A traceroute implementation using TCP packets


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239165





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-06-09 20:10 EST -------
This builds fine and rpmlint is quiet.

According to
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#PreReleasePackages
release should be 0.1.beta7%{?dist}.

This is another package that links statically with libnet.  Not that it has any
choice, but this requires a trip through FESCo.  Either that or the libnet
maintainer needs to get whatever patches debian uses to build libnet dynamically.

Review:
* source files match upstream:
   aed5b163ed4886f04242b46005a6cb4876ef38ad72001a94facb62a99dc99c57  
   tcptraceroute-1.5beta7.tar.gz
X package doesn't meet versioning guidelines for prerelease packages.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   tcptraceroute = 1.5-0.beta7.1.fc8
  =
   libpcap.so.0.9()(64bit)
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.  (Actually the 
  documentation is nearly twice as large as the lone executable, but the package 
  is only 142K.)
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

-- 
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.