[Bug 543608] Review Request: udisks - Storage Management Service

[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=543608





--- Comment #5 from Matthias Clasen <mclasen at redhat.com>  2009-12-03 20:31:20 EDT ---
Nevermind, they are relative.

Formal review:

Package name: ok
Spec file name: ok
Packaging guidelines: the guidelines nowadays contain language that forbids
  explicit dependencies for stuff thats already pulled in via library
  dependencies. So the Requires for dbus, dbus-glib, glib2, polkit, parted, 
  udev, libatasmart should be dropped unless you need the specific minimal 
  versions.
  It might be nice to have a /usr/libexec/udisks/ instead of dumping all the
  helpers into /usr/libexec, but thats not a must-fix.
License: ok
License field: ok
License file: ok
Spec file language: ok
Spec file readable: ok
Upstream sources: need upstream location
Buildable: ok
ExcludeArch: ok, none
BuildRequires: ok
Locale handling: ok
ldconfig: ok, no libs
system libraries: ok, no libs
relocatable: no
directory ownership: ok
duplicate files: ok
permissions: ok
%clean: ok
macro use: ok
permissible content: ok
large docs: ok
%doc content: ok
header files: ok, none
static libs: ok, none
pc files: ok, according to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/PkgconfigAutoRequires, which I
believe was recently accepted
shared libs: ok, none
devel deps: ok
libtool archives: ok, none
gui apps: ok, no gui app
file ownership: ok
%install: ok
utf8 filenames: ok


# TODO: should be fixed upstream

Is it ?


In summary: 
- remove explicit library dependencies, then the package is acceptable.
- additionally, consider using a subdir in /usr/libexec and fixing the TODO
upstream

-- 
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.