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: rman https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190086 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-04-28 13:25 EST ------- Everything looks good. Issues: Your Source URL points to a specific sourceforge mirror. Admittedly I was amazed that I was able to get the file on the first try, but I wonder if it's a good ide to do that. Is there any specific reason you chose to use that mirror? You don't package the stuff in contrib. If you wanted to, you'd need to delete or chmod 644 sco-wrapper.sh and then fix up end-of-line encodings and the perl shebang lines. You should ping upstream to include the text of their license. None of these are blockers. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 6d1d67641c6d042595a96a62340d3cc6 rman-3.2.tar.gz 6d1d67641c6d042595a96a62340d3cc6 rman-3.2.tar.gz-srpm * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, i386 and x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane. * no shared libraries are present. * package is not relocatable. * owns no non-%doc directories. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. O %check present, no test suite upstream. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review