[Bug 475132] Review Request: usbmon - Front-end for in-kernel usbmon
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Dec 14 00:13:25 UTC 2008
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475132
Kevin Fenzi <kevin at tummy.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blocks|177841 |
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin at tummy.com> 2008-12-13 19:13:25 EDT ---
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 (GPLv2)
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:
cbba81a5b47b811dafd897cd7bd72dee usbmon-5.2.tar.gz
cbba81a5b47b811dafd897cd7bd72dee usbmon-5.2.tar.gz.orig
See below - Package needs ExcludeArch
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 has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install
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.
OK - 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 have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
Issues:
A few general comments, unrelated to the packaging and thus moot for the
review,
but I thought I would mention them:
- You have your upstream url as your people.redhat.com page.
Perhaps it would be good to use a fedorahosted.org site for this?
That way you get bug tracking/mailing lists/vcs repo, etc.
See: https://fedorahosted.org/web/new
- You might add a note about the license version to the .c file.
No big deal since it's mentioned other places and is clearly your intent,
but just to be paranoid. ;)
Now, on to issues about the package:
1. I have no idea on the ExcludeArch. Does s390 have usb?
In any case it's not a blocker here as Fedora doesn't have s390 as a primary
arch.
You might ask the s390 list?
I don't see any other blockers here, this is a very simple package,
and is APPROVED.
Go ahead and continue the process from
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Get_a_Fedora_Account
If you have any questions don't hesitate to contact me via bugzilla, email,
or on irc (nirik on freenode).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list