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 200722 - Review Request: GraphicsMagick
Summary: Review Request: GraphicsMagick
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Parag AN(पराग)
QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2006-07-31 11:19 UTC by Andreas Thienemann
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2006-11-27 13:38:11 UTC
Type: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Andreas Thienemann 2006-07-31 11:19:53 UTC
Spec URL:
GraphicsMagick is a comprehensive image processing package which is initially
based on ImageMagick 5.5.2, but which has undergone significant re-work by
the GraphicsMagick Group to significantly improve the quality and performance
of the software.

Comment 1 Rex Dieter 2006-07-31 11:45:32 UTC

1. it appears
dir is unowned.

2.  in c++-devel subpkg:
Requires: %{name}-c++ = %{version}
Requires: %{name}-devel = %{version}
should be:
Requires: %{name}-c++ = %{version}-%{release}
Requires: %{name}-devel = %{version}-%{release}

Comment 2 Andreas Thienemann 2006-07-31 14:07:42 UTC
thx, changes are incorporated at the original location

Comment 3 Rex Dieter 2006-07-31 14:11:21 UTC
FYI, whenever you make a change to the package, you ought to increment the 
Release tag and add a changelog entry accordingly.

Comment 4 Andreas Thienemann 2006-07-31 14:16:02 UTC
Ahhhhrgl. I thought we went over that topic often enough? Wasn't the consensus
that bumping release numbers and changelogs during review is purely optional? It
really doesn't serve as far as I can see, as the bugzilla entry contains more
information then the changelog ever will.

Comment 5 Rex Dieter 2006-07-31 14:21:22 UTC
I don't know who you're referring to as "we", but IMO, the same rules that 
apply toward Fedora (Core/Extras) releases should be applied during reviews too.

Comment 6 Kevin Fenzi 2006-10-01 19:51:57 UTC
just IMHO, bumping release and adding changelogs is very usefull during reviews 
to me. It allows me to see that something was addressed and when. 

Some submitters have used -0.X during reviews and then bump release to -1 on 
import. I think thats fine if you are more comfortable with that... 

Any chance you could push our a new release with new release/changelog entries?

Comment 7 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-11-20 04:48:56 UTC
Is there any updates to package here?
Otherwise i can go for Official Review.

Comment 8 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-11-20 05:43:48 UTC
Oki had a look at packaging of this software and found that GraphicsMagick-devel
reporting files listed as twice. keep only
%{_includedir}/GraphicsMagick and remove other 2 lines starting with %{_includedir}.
Reupdate package by changing release tag.

Comment 9 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-11-24 04:24:59 UTC

Comment 10 Andreas Thienemann 2006-11-26 18:03:31 UTC
Package has been updated at the usual location.
Please take a look.

Comment 11 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-11-27 07:03:37 UTC
+ package builds in mock (development i386).
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and RPMS.
+ source files match upstream.
f75d830ca623bf10385b3ad62c48437a  GraphicsMagick-1.1.7.tar.bz2
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.  License text included in package.
+ %doc is small; no -doc subpackage required.
+ %doc does not affect runtime.
+ COPYING included in %doc.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ .pc file present.
+ -devel,-c++, -c++-devel, -perl subpackages exists
+ as subpackages are packaging .so files post and postun called /sbin/ldconfig
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available
+ Dose owns the directories it creates.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ perl subpackage followed perl packagaing.

Comment 12 Andreas Thienemann 2006-11-27 13:38:11 UTC
thx for the review, package is in cvs.

Comment 13 Michael Schwendt 2006-11-29 01:12:53 UTC
owners.list entry is missing!

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.