[Bug 188445] Review Request: bootconf

[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: bootconf


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188445





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-05-07 21:28 EST -------
OK, I found some time to finish this up. Things look mostly good; there are a
couple of really minor issues but at the end of my checklist I found one
problematic issue.  All of the things I found are below:

I don't know what's up with the specfile permissions; it's probably a bug in
either rpmbuild or rpmlint (since it probably should only complain about weird
permissions like 200 or security problems like mode 666).

You don't use the dist tag.  I assume you don't want to use it and know how to
juggle different specs between Fedora branches to preserve the upgrade path.

The %description for the -gui package could use a period, I guess.

Perhaps consider passing -p to install (both in the spec and in your Makefile)
to preserve timestamps.

And, the lone significant issue: The desktop file needs to be installed properly
with desktop-file-install; see
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop for more info.  When
you do that, things should go OK but you will notice a warning:
  bootconf.desktop: warning: value "Application;System;" for key "Categories" in 
   group "Desktop Entry" contains a deprecated value "Application"
I don't think that warning is particularly problematic.  Sorry for not noticing
this earlier.

* source files match upstream:
   8bda663ecc7aa661200a0b230302b0bc8ca9ce8c20128e9c8fef2775214d9b58  
   bootconf-1.2.tar.bz2
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK (-gui package could use a period).
* 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.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint has acceptable complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane:
  bootconf-1.2-2.noarch.rpm
   bootconf = 1.2-2
  =
   /usr/bin/python

  bootconf-gui-1.2-2.noarch.rpm
   bootconf-gui = 1.2-2
  =
   /bin/sh
   bootconf = 0:1.2-2
   pygtk2
   usermode

* %check is not present; not possible to test this automatically.  I installed 
   and ran it and it seemed to work OK.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* scriptlets are OK (update-desktop-database).
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
X desktop file not installed properly.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.