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: tolua++ - A tool to integrate C/C++ code with Lua https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193884 j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx 2006-06-02 15:19 EST ------- MUST: ===== * rpmlint output is: W: tolua++ no-soname /usr/lib64/libtolua++-5.1.so W: tolua++-devel no-documentation The no-soname warning must be fixed (see below) the other one is no problem * Package and spec file named appropriately * Packaged according to packaging guidelines * License (Freeware) ok, license file included (but see should fix) * spec file is legible and in Am. English. * Source matches upstream * Compiles and builds on devel-x86_64 * BR: ok * No locales * ldconfig properly run for shared libraries * Not relocatable * Package owns / or requires all dirs * No duplicate files & Permissions ok * %clean & macro usage OK * Contains code only * %doc does not affect runtime, and isn't large enough to warrent a sub package * -devel package as needed (see should fix though) * no gui -> no .desktop file required MUST fix: ========= * The rpmlint soname warning, you can fix this by adding: "LINKFLAGS="-Wl,-soname,lib%{solib}.so" Should fix: =========== * Replace "License: Freeware Style" with just "License: Freeware" * The tolua++ binary is a parser/compiler only used when building tolua++ using programs as such it belongs in the -devel subpackage IMHO. Remarks: ======== * "BuildRequires: lua-devel => 5.1" shouldn't that be: "BuildRequires: lua-devel >= 5.1" I'm surprised this even works? -- 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