[Bug 429037] Review Request: isns-utils - Daemon and tools for iSNS management.

[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: isns-utils - Daemon and tools for iSNS management.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429037


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-01-17 17:51 EST -------
Honestly I have no idea what iSNS is, and looking at this package doesn't
help.  Would it be too much to add a line of explanation to your %description?
Maybe
  The Internet Storage Name Service (iSNS) protocol allows automated
  discovery, management and configuration of iSCSI and Fibre Channel devices
  (using iFCP gateways) on a TCP/IP network.
?

I do not believe that the license of this package is GPLv2.  COPYING includes
the LGPL, the source files do not include any license headers at all and
README says LGPLv2+.  I believe the latter is correct.

  isns-utils.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/isns-utils-0.0/COPYING
You do need to pass this through iconv; the copyright symbols in the document
not valid utf8.

The other rpmlint complaints are OK.

* source files match upstream:
   8dacfd692f9f59181e346986e8ac65911908ae5daf756052fe2702b406e29816  
   open-isns-20070927.tar.bz2
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
? description could use a little explanation.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
X license field does not matche 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 (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
X rpmlint has a valid complaint.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   config(isns-utils) = 0.0-1.20070927snap.fc9
   isns-utils = 0.0-1.20070927snap.fc9
  =
   /bin/sh
   /sbin/chkconfig
   /sbin/service
   config(isns-utils) = 0.0-1.20070927snap.fc9
   libcrypto.so.7()(64bit)

* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  I have no way to test
  package (since I have no idea what it does).
* 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.
* %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/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.