[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-12-10 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System  ---
elmon-13b1-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-12-10 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System  ---
elmon-13b1-3.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-12-10 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System  ---
elmon-13b1-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-12-10 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2016-12-10 15:20:28



--- Comment #21 from Raphael Groner  ---
Thanks for pushing. Closing here.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-11-13 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(pa...@hubbitus.in
   ||fo)



--- Comment #20 from Raphael Groner  ---
F25: This update has reached 3 days in testing and can be pushed to stable now
if the maintainer wishes

F24: This update has reached 7 days in testing and can be pushed to stable now
if the maintainer wishes.

Pavel, please do so.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-26 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
elmon-13b1-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-0631ee4ae6

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-26 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
elmon-13b1-3.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-01d362b04d

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-26 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|ON_QA



--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
elmon-13b1-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-808126209f

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-26 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #15 from Pavel Alexeev  ---
I'll drop BR GCC.

Meantime:
> - The %make_build macro is available mostly but not recommended. Maybe
  use 'make %{?_smp_mflags}' instead that works in all distributions.

That macro recommended in
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package#.25build_section

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-26 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #16 from Pavel Alexeev  ---
And thank you Jon Ciesla.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-24 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/elmon

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-22 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #13 from Pavel Alexeev  ---
Thank you very much Raphael for the review. #1385856 has been taken. I have
taken #1380942 which you mention early.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-22 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Pavel Alexeev  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Alias||elmon



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-17 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #12 from Raphael Groner  ---
Maybe you can take a look into bug #1385856?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-16 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #11 from Raphael Groner  ---
APPROVED. No blockers found.

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
=> Ignore.
- Are you sure with GPLv3 only? Why not use GPLv3+? The plus sign stands
  for "or any later version". I fail to find any note that prevents that.
 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#GPL_Compatibility_Matrix
- The %make_build macro is available mostly but not recommended. Maybe
  use 'make %{?_smp_mflags}' instead that works in all distributions.


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "*No copyright* GPL (v3)", "Unknown or generated". 3 files have
 unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/builder
 /fedora-review/1197517-elmon/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
 provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
 %{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
 file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[-]:

[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-10 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #10 from Raphael Groner  ---
Thanks for the reminder. Could you take a look into bug #1380942?

As I'm busy with other things during the weeks, don't expect anything from me
for this review here earlier than on one of the next weekends.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-10 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #9 from Pavel Alexeev  ---
Raphael?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-08 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #8 from Pavel Alexeev  ---
Sure. What I could review for you?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-10-02 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|projects...@smart.ms
 Whiteboard|AwaitingSubmitter   |
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #7 from Raphael Groner  ---
I can look into a full review later. Are you interested in a review swap?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-09-13 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #6 from Pavel Alexeev  ---
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15615308

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-09-13 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Pavel Alexeev  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(pa...@hubbitus.in |
   |fo) |
   |needinfo?(pa...@hubbitus.in |
   |fo) |



--- Comment #5 from Pavel Alexeev  ---
Hello.

Sorry, I miss your comments. Thank you to look in.

>- Use a better name for the binary, elmon_x86_rhel52 looks bad.
It already installed as %{_bindir}/%{name}

> Are you sure about license is GPLv3, but not GPLv3+ (mind the plus)
Official site (http://elmon.sourceforge.net/) said wo, citing:
"This software is disributed under the terms of the GPL version 3 license."

Why you think Makefile wrong?


Description cut, BR gcc added:
Changes:
https://github.com/Hubbitus/Fedora-packaging/commit/c9cf5e7177f8c9b44738c3836441ec6168c59b72
Spec:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Hubbitus/Fedora-packaging/c9cf5e7177f8c9b44738c3836441ec6168c59b72/SPECS/elmon.spec
Srpm: http://rpm.hubbitus.info/Fedora24/elmon/elmon-13b1-2.fc24.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-07-11 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(pa...@hubbitus.in
   ||fo)



--- Comment #4 from Raphael Groner  ---
Another friendly reminder.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-06-16 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||pa...@hubbitus.info
 Whiteboard|Trivial |AwaitingSubmitter
  Flags||needinfo?(pa...@hubbitus.in
   ||fo)



--- Comment #3 from Raphael Groner  ---
Friendly reminder. Any news here?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org


[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2016-03-28 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517

Raphael Groner  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||projects...@smart.ms
 Whiteboard||Trivial



--- Comment #2 from Raphael Groner  ---
Some general advice in prior:
- Description is quite long, can you shorten that? See also change_log.txt
- Are you sure about license is GPLv3, but not GPLv3+ (mind the plus) that
  means "or any later version"?
- Remove 'rm -rf %{buildroot}' from %install, it's obsolete.
- Use a better name for the binary, elmon_x86_rhel52 looks bad.
  elmon may be enough for a proper name. Obviously, users won't install several
  multilib binaries in parallel, or what is the name suffix for?
- As it's one source file only in the tarball, I would recommend to skip the
  makefile and use a call to cc directly inside the spec %build, you've already
  manual installation, so why use wrong looking makefile.
- Add BuildRequires: gcc
 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequires_and_Requires

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

[Bug 1197517] Review Request: elmon - Performance monitoring tool

2015-03-01 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1197517



--- Comment #1 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)  ---
Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9112907

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review