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 213600
Summary: | Review Request: tinyca2 - Simple graphical userinterface to manage a small CA | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Enrico Scholz <rh-bugzilla> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | ||
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: | 2006-12-21 17:10:35 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
Enrico Scholz
2006-11-02 07:51:05 UTC
Not an official review since I am just a rookie. - rpmlint gives one warning on the src: tinyca2 mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs. A quick glance makes me think that the indentation used in the %description and for the sed lines (in %setup) might be the culprit - the buildroot line does not respect the preferred value for FE (%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)). Since this is just a PREFERRED not a MUST, should not be a blocker - MUST: package is named according to the guidelines - MUST: spec file name matches the base package name - MUST: license field matches actual license - MUST: the program is licensed under GPL but upstream did not include the actual text of the license is the source, just the reference to it. I guess you should ping upstream to add the license to the provided tar files. - MUST: spec file is in American English - MUST: spec file is legible - MUST: source matches upstream, md5sum being a7f63806dbdc38a34ed58e42e79f4822 for both - MUST: builds fine in mock/i386. Since the content is actually just a perl script + some message (.po) files which are formatted during the build phase, I assume it would succesfully build on any platform; created rpm is noarch - MUST: %find_lang macro is correctly used to pick locales - MUST: no libraries are installed, so there is no need for calling ldconfig in %post/%postun - MUST: package is not relocatable - MUST: owns all directories (and files) that it creates - MUST: no duplicate files in the %files listing - MUST: %clean is correct - MUST: makes consistent use of macros - MUST: no forbidden code/content included - MUST: large documentation does not exist, so no need for a separate -doc - MUST: the content of %doc is a small CHANGES file, so runtime functionality is not affected - MUST: no header or static files, no pkgconfig(.pc), no library files with a suffix, no ibtool archives, so no need for -devel - MUST: IS a GUI application; correctly includes %{name}.desktop (provided by upstream) and properly installs it with desktop-file-install; someone more experienced please comment if the "--add-category=X-Fedora" is still required (according to yesterday's FESCO: === Packaging Committee Report === * Voting to stop using the X-Fedora category in the desktop file is currently underway via email.) - MUST: does not take ownership of foreign files/directories - SHOULD: includes available translations - SHOULD: as specified above, builds fine in mock - SHOULD: on a RHEL4 system the rpm installed fine but the program did not run, failing with: error: Failed dependencies: perl(Gtk2) is needed by tinyca2-0.7.5-2.noarch perl(Gtk2::SimpleMenu) is needed by tinyca2-0.7.5-2.noarch perl(Locale::gettext) is needed by tinyca2-0.7.5-2.noarch On FC6 it detected the missing Requires, but failed to get installed even after installing perl-Gtk2 and gettext: error: Failed dependencies: perl(Locale::gettext) is needed by tinyca2-0.7.5-2.noarch It seems that the correct Requires should be perl-gettext rather then gettext. The program runs successfully after installing perl-Gtk2 and perl-gettext. - SHOULD: no scriplets at all, so neither unsane scriptlets Bottom line - cosmetic fixes: make rpmlint happy by replacing multiple spaces with tab (non blocker) - make reviewers happy by using the recommended build root line (non blocker) - use a correct Requires line (perl-gettext instead of gettext) (BLOCKER) Sorry, I have mixed BuildRequires with Requires in the last part of the review. I intented to say that you must add perl-gettext to the Requires line, which should become Requires: openssl tar zip perl-gettext ... unless I have made an evaluation error here and yum automatically picks and solves the dependencies for the needed perl modules. I for one I had to use yum search in order to find out which package provides perl-Locale-gettext. mmh... I don't understand > - SHOULD: on a RHEL4 system the rpm installed fine but the program > did not run, failing with: > error: Failed dependencies: > perl(Gtk2) is needed by tinyca2-0.7.5-2.noarch This seems to be an rpm message but not an error given out by the program. > On FC6 it detected the missing Requires, but failed to get installed > even after installing perl-Gtk2 and gettext: Who is "it"? > error: Failed dependencies: > perl(Locale::gettext) is needed by tinyca2-0.7.5-2.noarch mmh... this seems to be a bug in FC6 yum then. 'perl(Locale::gettext)' is provided by the perl-gettext packages both from FC5 and FC6. Within FC5, package and the perl-gettext dependency installed fine: | # http_proxy= yum localinstall tinyca2-0.7.5-2.noarch.rpm | Installing: | tinyca2 noarch 0.7.5-2 tinyca2-0.7.5-2.noarch.rpm 546 k | Installing for dependencies: | perl-gettext i386 1.05-8.fc5 extras 20 k | ... | Installed: tinyca2.noarch 0:0.7.5-2 | Dependency Installed: perl-gettext.i386 0:1.05-8.fc5 | Complete! | # OK,. let me rephrase: Everything is fine, my test failed because I was using only rpm rather then yum.:) The only problems are the two cosmetic ones (mixed spaces with tabs and the build root). sorry; I won't change these two issues. rpmlint is wrong about the whitespace-tab mixes and the buildroot with %(id...) is just stupid and not required Use :set list in vi and you will notice that rpmlint is not wrong about the mixes :) The buildroot is just a recommended value, so should not be a blocker. But it's up to a sponsor to decide. I am just a newcomer. I do not see mixed tab-spaces; TABs are used consistently. But I do not replace every ' +' with a TAB just because it ends at a tab-position. I do not need a sponsor; just a reviewer. I will review this later. NOTE: * would you consider using braces {} for using macro? I think using braces should make spec file easier to read...... Well, 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines : * License - (NOT A BLOCKER) original tarball does not include the copy of GPL license. You should ask upstream to include GPL copy. * Desktop files - For desktop-file-install, the line "--add-category X-Fedora" should be removed as * this is of no use any longer. * original desktop-file-utils 0.11 refuses this (although Fedora patched against this to only warn against this). See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/DesktopFiles 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines = Nothing 3. Other things I have noticed : * desktop file - (NOT A BROCKER) I strongly recommend that you install a icon which can be used for desktop entry and write to the spec file where (or how) we can get the icon. However, for a quick look I cannot find a proper icon from http://tinyca.sm-zone.net/ .... Would you ask upstream to provide a icon? Consider the comments above. However I can approve this package now. ---------------------------------------------------------- This package (tinyca2) is APPROVED by me. Don't forget to close this bug when rebuilds are done successfully. Well, what is the current state of this package? sorry; password manager does not work for wiki and I forget everytime the password and was not able to file a branch request (Well, for libextractor, I will check it later, althogh it may be tomorrow. By the way, it seems that tinyca2 has been already imported into FE-devel/6/5, so please close this bug when it is possible) ok; closed... |