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

Bug 639292

Summary: Review Request: erlang-etorrent - Erlang BitTorrent client and library
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: apatil, fedora-package-review, notting
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard: BuildFails
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-06-30 04:34:03 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On: 638909, 639263    
Bug Blocks:    

Description Peter Lemenkov 2010-10-01 11:57:32 UTC
Spec URL:
Description: This is a BitTorrent client and a library written in Erlang. The focus is on
robustness and scalability in number of torrents rather than in pure speed.
Etorrent is mostly meant for unattended operation, where one just specifies
what files to download and gets a notification when they are.

I'll provide Koji scratchuild and rpmlint as soon as all necessary buildrequires will be available in Koji

Comment 2 Peter Lemenkov 2010-12-05 18:49:27 UTC
rpmlint output:

sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint ../RPMS/ppc/erlang-etorrent-1.1.2-1.fc12.ppc.rpm 
erlang-etorrent.ppc: E: explicit-lib-dependency erlang-stdlib
erlang-etorrent.ppc: E: no-binary
erlang-etorrent.ppc: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
erlang-etorrent.ppc: W: no-manual-page-for-binary etorrentctl
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings.
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SPECS:

The first three messages are common for almost all erlang-related applications. Unfortunately, despite of whether package is arch-dependent or not it must be installed into %{_libdir} which is arch-dependent. The message "explicit-lib-dependency" should be ignored too - erlang/otp dependencies are still cannot be auto-detected (I'm working on this - expect something working in F-15 or F-16).

The last message means exactly what it says - there are no man-pages for this package yet.

Comment 3 anish 2011-08-25 08:37:08 UTC
Here's an unofficial review for F15,

+ rpmlint output

rpmlint output is not silent 
[makerpm@dhcp201-181 SRPMS]$ rpmlint erlang-etorrent-1.1.2-1.fc12.src.rpm 
erlang-etorrent.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scalability -> sociability, implacability, capability
erlang-etorrent.src: W: invalid-url Source0: jlouis-etorrent-v1.1.2-0-g229f2de.tar.gz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

+ Package Naming Guidelines
    * Spec file name is erlang-etorrent.spec and srpm name is erlang-etorrent-1.1.2-1.fc12.src.rpm which is okie 
+ Used global variables in the spec file which is good 

+ Sepc file is in American English 

+ License mentioned in spec file is "BSD" which looks okie 

+ Installed the erlang-etorrent-1.1.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm into the system following files are getting updated onto the   system 

Comment 4 Jason Tibbitts 2012-04-25 01:53:30 UTC
This fails to build for me on rawhide and on F17:

rebar compile
==> gproc-0 (compile)
ERROR: OTP release R15B does not match required regex R13B04|R14
make: *** [compile] Error 1

Not really sure what that means, but I guess the erlang in rawhide is too new to work with this code.

Please clear the whiteboard if providing a package which builds.

Comment 5 Jason Tibbitts 2012-06-29 22:25:30 UTC
It's been two months; should I just close this out?

Comment 6 Peter Lemenkov 2012-06-30 04:34:03 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> It's been two months; should I just close this out?

Yes, I think it should be closed now. I plan to return to it later but right now I'm not using it and don't have much time to maintain.