Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 203190
Summary: | Review Request: netlabel_tools | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | James Antill <james.antill> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | David Cantrell <dcantrell> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | j, sgrubb |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-09-05 20:57:22 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 163779 |
Description
James Antill
2006-08-18 20:18:55 UTC
I don't see you in owners.list; do you require sponsorship? Is there an upstream location for the source? You should provide a URL to the packages main page and make Source0: a full URL so that reviewers can compare against the upstream source. (I'm guessing that http://free.linux.hp.com/~pmoore/projects/linux_cipso/ is the upstream.) You don't use the %{?dist} tag, which is not strictly required but is recommended because it greatly simplifies maintainance across multiple releases. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag Your build root is not the recommended one: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) No %{?_smp_mflags} on your make line. If the package won't build in parallel, please add a comment indicating that. Note that this is not a complete review; I'm just commenting on a few things I noticed. > I don't see you in owners.list; do you require sponsorship? I'm not 100% sure what that means. I completed the CLA request successfully. However step three[1] gives me a traceback, if I try and add myself to the cvsextras group (which I assumed I needed to be in, but I'm not sure) ... so I just tried creating a package review request. All the changes to the packaging that you requested have been done (same spec file URL): http://people.redhat.com/jantill/netlabel_tools/netlabel_tools-0.16-3.src.rpm [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem I know it's hideously long, but the entire process document is at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors And there's a helpful bit at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/HowToGetSponsored The bottom line is that you have to be sponsored in order to receive a cvsextras account and so you need to find a willing sponsor. My plate is a bit full at the moment, unfortunately, since I've just today sponsored someone else from Red Hat. NEEDSWORK: - home_base_url is used exactly once. Why not just use it in Source0? - No URL tag - glibc-kernheaders package doesn't exist anymore. The new package name is kernel-headers. Kernel-headers provides glibc-kernheaders, but might as well use the new name. - Description starts with a space - setup should have -q flag for quiet. - Package does not build currently: INFO: entering directory libnetlabel/ ... CC netlabel_init.o In file included from netlabel_init.c:39: /builddir/build/BUILD/netlabel_tools-0.16/include/linux/netlabel.h:42:1: warning: "NLMSG_HDRLEN" redefined In file included from netlabel_init.c:38: /usr/include/linux/netlink.h:74:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition In file included from netlabel_init.c:39: /builddir/build/BUILD/netlabel_tools-0.16/include/linux/netlabel.h:45: error: redefinition of 'struct nlattr' In file included from netlabel_init.c:39: /builddir/build/BUILD/netlabel_tools-0.16/include/linux/netlabel.h:64:1: warning: "NLA_HDRLEN" redefined In file included from netlabel_init.c:38: /usr/include/linux/netlink.h:131:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition make[1]: *** [netlabel_init.o] Error 1 make: *** [libnetlabel] Error 2 All the changes to the packaging that you requested have been done (same spec file URL). The .src.rpm now passes rpmlint on a rawhide system[1]: http://people.redhat.com/jantill/netlabel_tools/netlabel_tools.spec http://people.redhat.com/jantill/netlabel_tools/netlabel_tools-0.16-4.src.rpm [1] Actually it warns the specfile is 600, but it's correct in the tar archive (before I create the .src.rpm) so I don't see how to fix this. Nevermind, I fixed the specfile thing too. Ok, again, and this seems to fix the mock bugs... http://people.redhat.com/jantill/netlabel_tools/netlabel_tools.spec http://people.redhat.com/jantill/netlabel_tools/netlabel_tools-0.16-5.src.rpm Builds, passes rpmlint, provides/requires look good, I'm going to pass this. Go ahead and request access to cvsextras and I'll approve it (as I'm sponsoring you) |