Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225647
Summary: Merge Review: compat-db Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: nobody@fedoraproject.org QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com CC: jnovy@redhat.com
Fedora Merge Review: compat-db
http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/compat-db/ Initial Owner: jnovy@redhat.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225647
Jochen Schmitt jochen@herr-schmitt.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jochen@herr-schmitt.de
--- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt jochen@herr-schmitt.de 2010-08-25 09:44:06 EDT --- I would suggest, that you should splitt this package into three main packages. One for each version of the BerkleyDb which should be supported.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225647
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |limburgher@gmail.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |limburgher@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com 2012-04-05 09:55:39 EDT --- Good:
- rpmlint checks return:
Lots of unversion-explicit provides and obsolete-not-provided which should be fixed/dropped etc.
compat-db.spec:209: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir} There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate.
Trivial fix.
compat-db45.x86_64: E: devel-dependency compat-db-headers Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package itself.
Fix, if possible.
compat-db45.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib There are only non binary files in /usr/lib so they should be in /usr/share.
Ignore, I suspect.
Lots of no-man-page-for-binary. Ignore.
Lots of rpath warning. Fix if at all possible.
- package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( BSD ) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file - devel package N/A - no .la files - post/postun ldconfig ok - devel requires base package n-v-r N/A
The requires situation is unorthodox, but logical given the nature of the package.
Really looks like it's just the rpmlint stuff, let me know if you'd like me to commit any of this.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla