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: chrpath - Modify rpath of compiled programs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199402 ------- Additional Comments From mr.ecik@xxxxxxxxx 2006-07-19 08:26 EST ------- I haven't been sponsored yet, so this is not official review. MUST items: * rpmlint doesn't show anything. * package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. * spec file is named correctly. * package is licensed with an open-source GPL license. * the License field in spec matches the actual license. * license file is included in %doc. * spec file is legible. * package succesfully compiles on i386. * there is no need to any build dependencies - package successfully compile on mock. * there is no locales. * there is no shared library files. * there is no duplicate files in %files section. * %files section includes %defattr line. * package has %clean section. * macros are used properly. * there is no need to -doc subpackage. * files in %doc don't affect the runtime of the application. * there is no GUI applications. COMMENTS: * I cannot check if sources match md5sum because I cannot connect to ftp.hungry.com server. * BuildRoot should be: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}- root-%(%{__id_u} -n) * why do you use 'make' instead of 'make %{?_smp_mflags}'? According to Parallel make chapter of Packaging Guidelines you should use the second option. -- 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