[Bug 532779] Review Request: gtraffic - Simple traffic usage counter for mobile broadband connections

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Nov 4 00:44:32 UTC 2009


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=532779





--- Comment #1 from Christoph Wickert <cwickert at fedoraproject.org>  2009-11-03 19:44:31 EDT ---
REVIEW for 7f6282bd6420f2ac611fd5a33e7b28a1  gtraffic-1.01-2.fc11.src.rpm

OK - MUST: rpmlint silent
OK - MUST: named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK - MUST: spec file name matches the base package %{name}
OK - MUST: package meets the Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines: GPLv3+
OK - MUST: License field in spec file matches the actual license
N/A - MUST: license file included in %doc
OK - MUST: spec is in American English
OK - MUST: spec is legible
OK - MUST: sources match the upstream source by MD5
4e3b45e8bbc7c111ee277944da754f80
OK - MUST: successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on all arches
OK - MUST: all build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires
N/A - MUST: handles locales properly with %find_lang
N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared
library files in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig
in %post and %postun
N/A - MUST: Not designed to be relocatable (none)
OK - MUST: owns all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: no duplicate files in the %files listing
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly, includes %defattr(...)
OK - MUST: package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK - MUST: consistently uses macros
OK - MUST: package contains code
N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application
N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package
N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package
N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then library
files that end in .so must go in a -devel package
N/A - MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully
versioned dependency
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file is properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section.
OK - MUST: packages does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
OK - MUST: at the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK - MUST: all filenames valid UTF-8


SHOULD Items:
N/A - SHOULD: Source package includes license text(s) as a separate file
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages
OK - SHOULD: builds in mock
OK - SHOULD: compiles and builds into binary rpms on all supported
architectures
OK - SHOULD: functions as described
N/A - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane
N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency
N/A - SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg
N/A - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin,
/sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the
file instead of the file itself.


Other items:
OK - latest stable version
OK - SourceURL valid
N/A - Compiler flags ok
N/A - Debuginfo complete


Issues:
- Missing Requires: gnome-python2-gconf (this will also pull in all other deps
such as pygtk2)
- require NetworkManager (or even NetworkManager-gnome)
- Description: change "network manager" to "NetworkManager"
- I'm not really happy with %{_bindir}/trafficd. How about renaming it to
gtrafficd? Just an idea and only if it doesn't cause too much trouble.

-- 
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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list