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 212513
Summary: | Review Request: sparse - source code semantec parser used by the Linux kernel | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Matt Domsch <matt_domsch> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Josh Boyer <jwboyer> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | bkyoung, jwboyer, tcallawa |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | kevin:
fedora-cvs+
|
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | 0-0.1.20061026git | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-11-06 13:08:28 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
Matt Domsch
2006-10-27 05:06:48 UTC
*** Bug 185325 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** bkyoung, I'm sorry I didn't see your review request when I went looking for this. I believe my spec is cleaner and per packaging guidelines, which should accelerate the process. Is there a reason not to use the snapshot tarballs that Dave Jones provides for sparse at http://www.codemonkey.org.uk/projects/git-snapshots/sparse/ ? Since sparse really doesn't do releases, that is about as close as it comes. Also, does "git" really have to be in the alphatag? Other than that, the package looks fairly clean. rpmlint doesn't complain about anything, license is fine, and the package builds on i386 just fine. I'll test ppc later. re: tarballs - doesn't honestly matter to me if the package has a daily snapshot tarball or a git clone'd tarball from a given day. I can put a comment in that snapshot tarballs are also available at DaveJ's site, or can use his tarballs directly, either way. re: git in the alphatag, that's a figment of git clone method above and Packaging/NamingGuidelines says to use it. I suppose if I used one of the snapshot tarballs, that could be dropped, though NamingGuidelines doesn't really cover this scenario exactly (a non-project-released snapshot tarball). Spot? Thanks for the additional review and comments. Package builds and works on x86_64 for me too btw; I haven't tried ppc. If you're using a manually created git clone, then yeah, the git in the alphatag should be there. If you use one of the snapshots from upstream, then you don't have to. (In reply to comment #4) > re: tarballs - doesn't honestly matter to me if the package has a daily snapshot > tarball or a git clone'd tarball from a given day. I can put a comment in that > snapshot tarballs are also available at DaveJ's site, or can use his tarballs > directly, either way. > > re: git in the alphatag, that's a figment of git clone method above and > Packaging/NamingGuidelines says to use it. I suppose if I used one of the > snapshot tarballs, that could be dropped, though NamingGuidelines doesn't really > cover this scenario exactly (a non-project-released snapshot tarball). Spot? Well, the only reason I suggested the DaveJ snapshots was to basically avoid the git in the alphatag. It's not really a big deal to me. > Thanks for the additional review and comments. Package builds and works on > x86_64 for me too btw; I haven't tried ppc. I don't expect problems on ppc. It should just work. GOOD ==== * Package and spec named appropriately: See note below * Spec file is legible and in Am. English * Source matches upstream: See note below * No unnecessary BuildRequires * No locales * No shared libraries in the default linker path * RPM_BUILD_ROOT cleaned where appropriate * Not relocatable * No duplicate %files * File permissions look ok * No need for a -devel subpackage * Not a gui program; no need for a .desktop file * Consistent use of macros * Does not own any directories that it should not own. Note: I've sent an email to the upstream developers discussing a possible official release. If that comes to pass, we can use those for this package. Until then, git or tarball snapshots will work just fine. This package builds fine on ppc. This passes review. packages built and released, closing. Please transfer ownership of sparse on all branches to Roland McGrath. cvs done. |