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: latencytop - System latency monitor


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431047


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-02-03 23:41 EST -------
Review:
+ package builds in mock (rawhide).
+ rpmlint on for SRPM and RPM.
latencytop.i386: W: no-documentation
+ source files match upstream.
3ed2878fb7772e2a500ec71aa01abbb2  latencytop-0.3.tar.gz
+ 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 is included in source code.
- %doc files NOT present.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Compiler flags used correctly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code.
+ no static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage exists.
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available.
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ no scriptlets are used.
+ Not a GUI app.

SHHOULD:
  1)Better recreate latencytop-standard-cflags.patch that will remove
unnecessary space caught in last few lines of patch.
  2)Try to ask upstream to include some README where it should be written what
this tool does and what are its limitations like this works on kernel >= 2.6.24
  3) Hope to see upstream will include license file in next upstream release.

APPROVED.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

Reply via email to