Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: openais standards based cluster framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192889 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO| |188267 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-14 03:09 EST ------- My review from yesterday got lost with the bugzilla crash: Review ====== rpmlint output: E: openais non-readable /usr/sbin/ais-keygen 0700 E: openais non-standard-executable-perm /usr/sbin/ais-keygen 0700 (required permissions) W: openais non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec (not *that* non-standard) W: openais incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/openais $prog (daemon and package name are incoherent upstream) W: openais-devel conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/ld.so.conf.d/openais-i686.conf (is anyone *really* going to edit this file anyway?) I don't believe any of these are blockers, or even need fixing. - package and spec file naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is BSD, matches spec, text included - spec file written in ENglish and is legible - sources match upstream - builds OK in mock for rawhide (i386) - buildreqs OK - no locale-specific data - shared libraries present in -devel package (only needed for devel) ldconfig is properly called in %post and %postun for the devel package - not relocatable - no directory ownership or permissions issues - no duplicate files - %clean section present and correct - macro usage is consistent - code, not content - documentation volume not excessive - docs don't affect runtime - header files properly located in -devel package - static libraries disabled - no pkgconfig file - -devel package has fully-versioned dependency on main package - no libtool archives included - not a GUI application, so no desktop file needed - scriptlets are sane Issues ====== - package is ExclusiveArch: i386 ppc x86_64 ppc64 Since this covers all current Fedora Core architectures, why is it present? - please correct confusing 0.76-1.6 changelog entry Once these are addressed, I'll be in a position where I'd be happy to approve this package if it was for Fedora Extras, However, I cannot approve Core packages, so someone else will need to do that. Post-review, it was noted that the package failed to build on x86_64 due to "-fPIC" being missing from CFLAGS, This was to be fixed by a patched Makefile. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedorafirstname.lastname@example.org http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review