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 215185
Summary: | Review Request: compat-libosip2 - compatability package for libosip2 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jeffrey C. Ollie <jeff> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Kevin Fenzi <kevin> |
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: | 2006-11-15 19:55:08 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, 197166 |
Description
Jeffrey C. Ollie
2006-11-12 02:54:24 UTC
Wanting to help get the broken package report down some, here's a review. ;) See below - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines See below - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 40ee3ec89030f0d6dfdb2cf6100e6685 libosip2-2.2.2.tar.gz 40ee3ec89030f0d6dfdb2cf6100e6685 libosip2-2.2.2.tar.gz.1 OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun See below - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig OK - .so files in -devel subpackage. OK - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane: SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag Issues: 1. Your naming doesn't seem right to me... compat-libosip2-2.2.2-2.2.2-5 should be just compat-libosip2-2.2.2-5 right? ie, the 2.2.2 in the Name should be removed. 2. Shouldn't you Provides: libosip2 = %{version}-%{release} instead of the Conflicts? Then this version will replace the older libosip2 packages and provide the same things for things like linphone? 3. The devel subpackage has a .pc file, so it should Requires: pkgconfig 4. rpmlint says: W: compat-libosip2-2.2.2 summary-not-capitalized oSIP is an implementation of SIP Can be ignored. W: compat-libosip2-2.2.2 incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.2.2-4 2.2.2-5.fc7 Missing changelog entry for changes to the compat package? E: compat-libosip2-2.2.2 obsolete-not-provided libosip2 See issue #2? W: compat-libosip2-2.2.2 summary-not-capitalized oSIP is an implementation of SIP E: compat-libosip2-2.2.2-devel obsolete-not-provided libosip2-devel Same thing with the -devel subpackage... Spec URL: http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/6/SRPMS/compat-libosip2-2.2.2-7.fc6.spec SRPM URL: http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/6/SRPMS/compat-libosip2-2.2.2-7.fc6.src.rpm * Mon Nov 13 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie <jeff> - 2.2.2-7 - Fix up provides/obsoletes/conflicts - Fix package name 1. Looks good. 2. I think you also still need to have the Obsoletes: as well as the Provides. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-581c3fb3ff1c6ef7404e8b288b59cd5280d75ad6 3. Looks good. 4. Looks good. Ah... I knew that the provides/obosletes thing was documented *somewhere*... Spec URL: http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/6/SRPMS/compat-libosip2-2.2.2-8.fc6.spec SRPM URL: http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/6/SRPMS/compat-libosip2-2.2.2-8.fc6.src.rpm * Mon Nov 13 2006 Jeffrey C. Ollie <jeff> - 2.2.2-8 - Add Obsoletes ok, that looks good. Thats the last blocker that I see... so this package is APPROVED. Please remember to close this NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built. Also consider doing a review on another waiting package to help spread out the reviewing load. Ok, imported and built for FC-5, FC-6, and devel |