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: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 fedora.wickert@xxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|fedora.wickert@xxxxxxxx |bugzilla-sink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO| |177841 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From fedora.wickert@xxxxxxxx 2006-05-05 14:04 EST ------- Sorry it took so long. The good thing about this is that I had enough time to really test your package. Hylafax works prefectly here together with a capi4hylafax package I rolled. Still I don't have a analog modem to test. GOOD: - Source matches upstream now $ md5sum ~/downloads/hylafax-4.3.0.1.tar.gz (from osdn.sf.net) 30f6e56629f6a0ff40846be30a4f4ab8 /home/chris/downloads/hylafax-4.3.0.1.tar.gz $ md5sum ~/Desktop/hylafax-4.3.0.1.tar.gz (from SRPM) 30f6e56629f6a0ff40846be30a4f4ab8 /home/chris/Desktop/hylafax-4.3.0.1.tar.gz - License field ok - explicit dependency on libtiff removed BAD: - still can't build this on my Core 5 machine, only mock succeeds. pkg-config still looks in /usr/local/.. - rpmlint errors in detail: RPM (build in mock from your srpm): $ rpmlint hylafax-4.3.0.1-1.fc5.i386.rpm | sort E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.daily/hylafax E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.hourly/hylafax E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/hylafax safe to ignore E: hylafax invalid-soname /usr/lib/libfaxserver.so.4.3.0.1 libfaxserver.so E: hylafax invalid-soname /usr/lib/libfaxutil.so.4.3.0.1 libfaxutil.so ok for me, I don't see a reason for changing this and for splitting out 2 symlinks into a seperate devel-package. E: hylafax non-executable-script /var/spool/hylafax/bin/notify.awk 0444 is this on purpose? If not fix it upstream. ok then E: hylafax non-readable /var/spool/hylafax/etc/hosts.hfaxd 0600 E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/archive 0700 E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/docq 0700 E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/doneq 0700 E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/pollq 0700 E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/sendq 0700 E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/tmp 0700 due to ownership of uucp, safe to ignore. Nevertheless I suggest the other dirs in /var/spool/hylafax to be owned by root. E: hylafax script-without-shellbang /usr/sbin/faxsetup.linux ignore or fix upstream W: hylafax devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfaxserver.so W: hylafax devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfaxutil.so still no reason for a sepate -devel package IMO W: hylafax incoherent-version-in-changelog 4.2.5.6-1 4.3.0.1-1.fc5 make sure the version field and changelog are matching. Please insert a blank line after every changelog entry. ;) W: hylafax non-conffile-in-etc /etc/hylafax/faxcover_example_sgi.ps safe to ignore, otherwise mark this file as %config SRPM: rpmlint ../hylafax-4.3.0.1-1.src.rpm E: hylafax no-%clean-section IMHO you should replace [ "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" != "/" ] && rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT with a simple rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT Your version is safer for other systems but this is a fedora package after all. Anyway: I realized I'm not allowed to review your package. You are a first timer, I'm not a sponsor. "The primary Reviewer can be any current package owner, unless the Contributor is a first timer." http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines#head-e1a114b23499786e13113ebf072d03a8f8d02094 So I have added the review to the FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracker. You will have to wait fore someone to sponsor you. Sorry, there's nothing I can do for you ATM. -- 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