[Bug 495411] Review Request: dnsjava - Java DNS implementation

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495411





--- Comment #4 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) <pahan at hubbitus.info>  2009-04-14 10:55:20 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)

> * rpmlint says:
>    dnsjava.src:106: W: libdir-macro-in-noarch-package (main package)
>       This one is a false warning and can be ignored
I also think it is wrong. Is there bug for that on rpmlint?

>    dnsjava.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/dnsjava-2.0.6/Changelog
>       We need to fix this. "iconv" will help.
Off course I seen this. But I do not know from *what* encoding it should be
recoded. Enca also do not help me:
$ enca Changelog
Unrecognized encoding

I think it is not very big problem in any case.

> ! There are some example .java files in the root of the tarball. Their usage
> are explained in the USAGE file. I think these .java files need to go to %doc
> (of the main package). Alternatively, you can build them and put them in
> %{_datadir}/%{name} or so. (You mention about these files in the %description
> too)
Ok, I put *.java into docs.

> * There is a tests directory. The README file mentions about building and
> running these compile tests. We should make a %check section and run these
> tests, if possible.
Tests added.

> ? Shouldn't the group tag be "System Environment/Libraries"?
I do not know. Seriously. Let it be, if you want.

> ! Since you are building the javadoc from source, you can remove the existing
> doc/ directory in %prep
Added.

> * README file says: 
>    "dnsjava is placed under the BSD license.  Several files are also under
>    additional licenses; see the individual files for details."
> I found that the files org/xbill/DNS/Tokenizer.java,
> org/xbill/DNS/ZoneTransferIn.java are licensed under MIT
> This makes the license BSD and MIT
I must place "BSD and MIT" into License tag? Or what I must do with it?

> * This comment contains single % macro
>    #ant -Dj2se.javadoc=%{_javadocdir}/java clean docsclean dnssec jar docs
> Do we need this comment?
No, this commetn unneeded anymore. Deleted.

> ! Also these comments are not needed. They can be removed:
>    #Epoch:         0
>    #Vendor:                JPackage Project
>    #Distribution:  JPackage
Off course. I comment out it, but leave for historical reasons. Any
disadvantage from it?

> 
> * This changelog entry contains single % macro
>    - In Source0 tag inject %%{name} and %{version} macroses.
Fixed.
Hmmm, very strange why rpmlint was silent on it?! I recheck it now and it is
also silent about this concrete error.

> (Also macroses->macros)
> 
> * "%attr(-,root,root)" is redundant in the line
>    %attr(-,root,root) %{_libdir}/gcj/%{name}
> I reported this to java folks a while ago. They still didn't fix this
> guideline.
I thought also when copied...
May you correct guidelines?
Fixed in my spec.

> ! In the description, please separate the paragraphs with blanks lines. It'll
> look better.
Ok :)
Done.

> * These BR's seem unnecessary: jce, java-javadoc
Why? It comes from JPackage rpm and i do not touch this.

> * BR: jpackage-utils is listed twice.
Fixed.

> * You don't want to write "specific_version" in Requires. If you need to pull
> openjdk-devel instead of gcj-devel, you can use something like >=1.7 or
> >=1:1.6.0
> * Also use the same number (>=1.7 or >=1:1.6.0) for Requires: java  
Sorry. It is my stupid copy/past. Fixed.



http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora9/dnsjava/dnsjava-2.0.6-3.fc9.src.rpm

-- 
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.