[Bug 442873] Review Request: virt-df - Utility like 'df' for virtual guests

[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: virt-df - Utility like 'df' for virtual guests


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442873


clalance at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|rjones at redhat.com           |clalance at redhat.com




------- Additional Comments From clalance at redhat.com  2008-05-19 11:38 EST -------
OK, review with updated package:

+ rpmlint output

Clean, according to bug submitter.

+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
+ license matches the actual package license
+ %doc includes license file
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
+ %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ does not use Prefix: /usr
+ package owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate files in %files
+ %defattr line
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ consistent use of macros
+ package must contain code or permissible content
n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a header files should be in -devel
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a packages should not contain libtool .la files
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc.

It actually starts with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, but I believe that is valid as
part of the guidelines, and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT is used consistently throughout the
specfile.

+ filenames must be valid UTF-8

Optional:

+ if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
- translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if available

Translations of these don't seem to be available

- reviewer should build the package in mock
+ the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
- review should test the package functions as described
+ scriptlets should be sane
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
+ shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin

This package looks fine.

APPROVED

-- 
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.