[Bug 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #25 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: httpress New Branches: epel7 Owners: nmav InitialCC: -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #26 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository. -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #17 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Thank you Adrien. -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #18 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: httpress New Branches: f20 Owners: nmav -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #19 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Package does not appear to exist in pkgdb currently, if this is a new package use a New Package Request. -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #20 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: httpress Short Description: HTTP stress benchmark utility Owners: nmav Branches: f20 InitialCC: -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #21 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2014-03-20 09:25:44 --- Comment #22 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Thank 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20 -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #15 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- I see. libev dropped pkg-config support for some reason. I've now hard coded the -I path in the spec. -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282
--- Comment #16 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com ---
Legend:
X - valid
! - Invalid
N∕A - not concerned
[X]: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1]
httpress.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US weighttp - weighty,
weightily, weightless
httpress.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi - mulch, mufti
httpress.src:39: E: files-attr-not-set
httpress.src:40: E: files-attr-not-set
httpress.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
httpress.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
httpress.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
httpress.src: W: no-%clean-section
httpress.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US weighttp - weighty,
weightily, weightless
httpress.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi - mulch, mufti
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 8 warnings
- Error and warning concern only EPEL5/6. If you confirm me you don't
target EPEL, this is fine
[X]: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
[X]: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] .
[X]: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
[X]: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
- BSD
[X]: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[3]
[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 must be included in %doc.[4]
[X]: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]
[X]: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]
[X]: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it is
used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be
specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to
deal with this.
86413b065d85b7d9e0af63a205465310853fe67dbfe8d15b92cdbd7fda17a642
httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20.x86_64/httpress-1.1.0.tar.gz
86413b065d85b7d9e0af63a205465310853fe67dbfe8d15b92cdbd7fda17a642 1.1.0.tar.gz
[X]: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]
rawhide : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6653211
[N/A]: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line. [8]
[X]: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[N/A]: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9]
[N/A]: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10]
[N/A]: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11]
[N/A]: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker. [12]
[X]: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create
a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create
that directory. [13]
[X]: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)[14]
[X]: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. [15]
[X]: Each package must consistently use macros. [16]
- see comments
[X]: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17]
[N/A]: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition
of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [18]
[X]: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly
if it is not present. [18]
[N/A]: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [19]
[N/A]: Development files must be in a -devel package. [20]
[N/A]: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages
[Bug 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #14 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com --- Hi Nikos, The problem concerning the compilation on rawhide still exist : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6648099 The pkgconfig file seems to not exist anymore for libev in rawhide. Can you try to see with the libev package maintainer if he can revert this change or try to patch your package to not use pkgconfig on rawhide. Adev -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(ade...@gmail.com) --- Comment #12 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Hello, Is that package still under review? -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags|needinfo?(ade...@gmail.com) | --- Comment #13 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com --- Hi Nikos, I aplogize for the delay, I take care of this ASAP. Today if possible. -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ade...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ade...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #10 from Adrien Devresse ade...@gmail.com --- Hi Nikos, Alexandre is doing this review as part of his process to become packager. I'm his sponsor, I know take the responsability of this review. First thing, it seems to be recent, which explain that you did not see it but YOur package does not compile anymore for rawhide, due to a missing pkgconfig file. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6599181 + cd /builddir/build/BUILD + cd yarosla-httpress-d8c968cead5a ++ pkg-config libev --cflags Package libev was not found in the pkg-config search path. Perhaps you should add the directory containing `libev.pc' to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable No package 'libev' found -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Fabian Affolter m...@fabian-affolter.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@fabian-affolter.ch Blocks||563471 (FE-SECLAB) Alias||httpress Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563471 [Bug 563471] Tracker: Review Requests for Fedora Security Lab related packages -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #11 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Adrien Devresse from comment #10) Hi Nikos, Alexandre is doing this review as part of his process to become packager. I'm his sponsor, I know take the responsability of this review. First thing, it seems to be recent, which explain that you did not see it but YOur package does not compile anymore for rawhide, due to a missing pkgconfig file. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6599181 Hello Adrien, I see that httpress.spec has libev-devel as dependency so the libev.pc pkg-config should exist in rawhide. Could it be than an older version of the rpm was fed into koji? I can successfully run mock on f20 and f21 locally. -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #3 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Updated SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/httpress-1.1.0-2.hgd8c968cead5a.fc20.src.rpm Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/httpress.spec -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #4 from Alexandre Beche alexandre.be...@gmail.com --- It seems the package does not compile for EPEL5/6 so lets focus on ferora release. Before going through the main review, can I ask you the following small fixes: - Put the license in a LICENSE file instead of the sources (not mandatory but get the package a bit cleaner). - Remove the commit number from the spec file (including the Release line and the changelog). - Clean the changelog (keep only the newest line properly formated as described in [1]). Cheers, Alexandre [1]: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #5 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Hello, On the LICENSE, I think that I should wait for upstream to add a license file instead rather than putting a license for him (he's been contacted, and such a file will probably be added on the next release). The commit number it is part of the sources downloaded from bitbucket so it cannot be removed. What I can remove is from it being part of the version. Would that address your issue? -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #6 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/httpress.spec -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282
--- Comment #7 from Alexandre Beche alexandre.be...@gmail.com ---
Hello,
Please find below my informal review (note that it is my first one :) so I may
have been too strict or permissive on some points). I think it will answers
your two previous comments.
If you have doubt on any point, let me know.
Cheers,
Alex
__ = To be corrected
OK = Accepted
NA = Not Applicable
#
# MUST
#
[__] - rpmlint on source and binary rpm (report enclosed below)
rpmlint httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm
httpress.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US weighttp - weight
httpress.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi - mulch, mufti
httpress.src: W: invalid-url Source0: httpress-1.1.0.tar.gz
rpmlint httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
httpress.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US weighttp - weight
httpress.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi - mulch, mufti
httpress.x86_64: W: no-documentation
httpress.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary httpress
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
Could you please have a look to the following warning:
httpress.src: W: invalid-url Source0: httpress-1.1.0.tar.gz
rpmlint -I invalid-url
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
In addition (not mandatory but part of the SHOULD section), is there any chance
you to add doc/man page. I know it's probably not meaningful, but warning
should go away.
[OK] - The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[OK] - The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[__] - The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
* Compilation flags does not seems to be correct
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags), I would
rather suggest:
CFLAGS=${CFLAGS:-%optflags} ; export CFLAGS ;
CXXFLAGS=${CXXFLAGS:-%optflags} ; export CXXFLAGS ;
[OK] - The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
[OK] - The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[OK] - 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 must be included in %doc.
[OK] - The spec file must be written in American English.
[OK] - The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[OK] - The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
86413b065d85b7d9e0af63a205465310853fe67dbfe8d15b92cdbd7fda17a642
httpress-1.1.0.tar.gz (srcrpm)
86413b065d85b7d9e0af63a205465310853fe67dbfe8d15b92cdbd7fda17a642
httpress-1.1.0.tar.gz
(https://bitbucket.org/yarosla/httpress/get/httpress-1.1.0.tar.gz)
[OK] - The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6576209
f21: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6576227
f20: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6576231
[OK] - If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[OK] - All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[NA] - The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[NA] - Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[OK] - Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[NA] - If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package.
[NA] - A package must own all directories that it creates.
[OK] - A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
[OK] - Permissions on files must be set properly.
[OK] - Each package must consistently use macros.
[OK] - The package must contain code, or permissable content
[NA] - Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[NA] - If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
[NA] - Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[NA] - Development files must be in a -devel package.
[NA] - In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
[OK] - Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
[NA] - Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.
[OK] - Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[OK] - All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
#
# SHOULD
#
[__] - If the source
[Bug 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #8 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Thanks. [__] - rpmlint on source and binary rpm (report enclosed below) rpmlint httpress-1.1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm httpress.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US weighttp - weight httpress.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi - mulch, mufti These are not intentional rather than spelling errors, so I've not corrected them. httpress.src: W: invalid-url Source0: httpress-1.1.0.tar.gz Now it includes the URL as well as a rule to rename the obtained file. httpress.x86_64: W: no-documentation httpress.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary httpress I've hacked a man page that I plan to send upstream. (the package is updated in-place of the old one) -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #9 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- (btw. you may want to set the fedora-review flag to '?' so that the package is marked as under review) -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 Alexandre Beche alexandre.be...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alexandre.be...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Alexandre Beche alexandre.be...@gmail.com --- Hi, I am currently doing an informal review of your package. Do you plan to put your package under EPEL5/6 reposiroty? Cheers, Alexandre -- 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 1062282] Review Request: httpress - HTTP stress benchmark utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1062282 --- Comment #2 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmavr...@redhat.com --- Thanks. I wasn't really planning for that, but if there are no issues compiling there it could be an option. -- 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
