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 206842
Summary: | Review Request: seq24 - Real-time MIDI sequencer | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Anthony Green <green> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Gérard Milmeister <gemi> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | gemi, panemade |
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: | 2006-09-26 18:15:23 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
Anthony Green
2006-09-17 07:17:27 UTC
{Not Official Reviewer} packaging looks ok. + Mockbuild is successfull for i386 FC6 + rpmlint on binary rpm is silent - dist tag is NOT present + Buildroot is correct + source URL is correct + BR is correct + License used is GPL + License file COPYING is included + desktop file is handled correctly + MD5 sum on tarball is matching upstream tarball b2c39dad73f803727c39c2e2e443ebdb seq24-0.8.7.tar.gz + No duplicate files Application got installed correclty. Desktop icon is visible also. (In reply to comment #1) > - dist tag is NOT present Thanks. Fixed this... as well as a few other things. Updated bits here: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/seq24.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/seq24-0.8.7-2.src.rpm One more little fix (to Requires(post,postun))... Updated bits here: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/seq24.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/seq24-0.8.7-3.src.rpm Change Source: http://filter24.org/seq24/seq24-0.8.7.tar.gz to Source: http://filter24.org/seq24/seq24-%{version}.tar.gz Try to avoid hardcoding version in Source URL. * Also include seq24usr.example and TODO with the docs * Modify the description, so that it is not in the first person * Either use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}, but not both. I prefer $RPM_BUILD_ROOT These updated bits take care of comment #4 and comment #5. Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/seq24.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/seq24-0.8.7-4.src.rpm * source files match upstream: b2c39dad73f803727c39c2e2e443ebdb seq24-0.8.7.tar.gz * package meets naming and packaging guidelines * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently * dist tag is present * build root is correct * license field matches the actual license * license is open source-compatible, license text included in package * latest version is being packaged * BuildRequires are proper * compiler flags are appropriate * %clean is present * package builds in mock (FC-5, i386) * package installs properly * rpmlint is silent * final provides and requires are sane: * package is not relocatable * owns the directories it creates * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't * no duplicates in %files * file permissions are appropriate * scriptlets update icons cache * code, not content * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package * no headers * no pkgconfig files * no libtool .la droppings I have two complaints: 1. I'd rather have the description in a non-personalized style. However you may do as you wish, it is not a blocker. 2. The dump command conflicts with the /sbin/dump command, although they are not in the same directory. I recommend renaming "dump" to "seq24-dump". The source code does not reference it, so this should suffice. Upstream should also be notified. (In reply to comment #7) > I have two complaints: > 1. I'd rather have the description in a non-personalized style. However > you may do as you wish, it is not a blocker. > 2. The dump command conflicts with the /sbin/dump command, although they > are not in the same directory. I recommend renaming "dump" to "seq24-dump". > The source code does not reference it, so this should suffice. Upstream > should also be notified. Fixed. So, is this approved? Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/seq24.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/devel/seq24-0.8.7-5.src.rpm APPROVED (In reply to comment #9) > APPROVED Thanks for working on this! |