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: tkdnd https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193632 ------- Additional Comments From wart@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-08 11:00 EST ------- Looks good! Only two (nitpicking) minor issues: MUST ==== * Source matches upstream: 43c91da595aade4978e2e5e820ab0fc9 tkdnd-1.0a2.tar.gz * rpmlint output clean * Spec file legible and in Am. English * No excessive BuildRequires: * BSD license ok, license file included * No .desktop file needed * No -devel subpackage needed * No need for -docs subpackage * No duplicate %files * Permissions look ok MUSTFIX ======= * Remove the extra directory in %doc by adding a wildcard: %doc doc/* * Move the "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" to the very first line in %install SHOULD ====== * You need BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel if you plan to build on FC4. You can do this by either forking the spec files in CVS, or adding the following to the current spec file: %if "%fedora" <= "4" BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel %else BuildRequires: libXext-devel %endif * An alpha release of version 2.0 is available. Have you considered upgrading, or is the alpha version not stable enough? * Notify upstream about the 64-bit build issues and send them the patch. -- 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