[Bug 523553] Review Request: mutrace - Mutex Tracer

[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=523553


Michel Alexandre Salim <michael.silvanus at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|needinfo?(michael.silvanus@ |
                   |gmail.com)                  |




--- Comment #15 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michael.silvanus at gmail.com>  2009-10-06 23:18:39 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> 
> > ? license complies with guidelines
> I don't see how mutrace should ever be used for Fedora infrastructure.
Fair enough.

> > FIX source matches upstream
> > $ sha1sum mutrace-0.1.tar.gz ../SOURCES/mutrace-0.1.tar.gz 
> > dcb16f9a80262cb608f641ee5c960b15def6ad83  mutrace-0.1.tar.gz
> > 6017fc40158663eeffec4c70ba69cf04cde11ef2  ../SOURCES/mutrace-0.1.tar.gz
> 
> Fixed now.
> 
Verified
$ sha1sum mutrace-0.1.tar.gz ../SOURCES/mutrace-0.1.tar.gz 
ea972f8666933fb297b9791187858ccca3fecff7  mutrace-0.1.tar.gz
ea972f8666933fb297b9791187858ccca3fecff7  ../SOURCES/mutrace-0.1.tar.gz

> > FIX build dependencies complete
> >   missing binutils-devel
> 
> Fixed.
OK
> 
> > FIX no dupes in %files
> >   no dupes, but some unpackaged files: %{_libdir}/libmatrace.so and
> >   libmutrace-backtrace-symbols.so
> 
> Fixed.
OK
> 
> > SHOULD
> > FIX if license text missing, ask upstream to include it
> >   corresponding GPL license text not included
> 
> It is included.
Em, I don't see it. I see these license files:
GPL  ==> GPL v2 (needed)
LGPL ==> LGPL v3 (needed)

per the LGPL file,

"""
  This version of the GNU Lesser General Public License incorporates
the terms and conditions of version 3 of the GNU General Public
License, supplemented by the additional permissions listed below.
"""

Per the FSF's instructions:
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-howto.html

"""
You should also include a copy of the license itself somewhere in the
distribution of your program. All programs, whether they are released under the
GPL or LGPL, should include the text version of the GPL. In GNU programs the
license is usually in a file called COPYING.
"""

since you use LGPLv3+, you must bundle the GPLv3 license text as well.


> > FIX package build in mock on all architectures
> >   not using mock yet, BR problem
> 
> Uh?
I didn't build the package in mock, since the build dependencies were not
complete (and there were unpackaged files), and I figured I'd have to test the
fixed package anyway.

There are some failures on PPC, both with F-11 and F-12:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1732211

In mutrace.c, you define DEBUG_TRAP on non-x86 architectures as raise(SIGTRAP),
but you are not #ifdef-including signal.h

> > OK package functioned as described
> > FIX require package not files
> >   require util-linux-ng rather than /usr/bin/getopt ?  
> 
> /usr/bin/getopt is pretty generic and changed packages a couple of times in the
> past, which is is why I decided to stick with a path dependency instead of
> package dependency.
Fair enough

I'm attaching the patch, which allows building on non-x86 architectures;
incorporate that and add the missing GPLv3 text and this package should be
ready to go.

-- 
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.