Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478593 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter <fabian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-04 18:02:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > Really minor suggestions: > - since the spec mostly has a double blank line between sections, you should do > that also between build and install sections. fixed > - The description could be improved (spelling and case at least). Perhaps: > Description: > fspy is an easy to use linux filesystem activity monitoring tool. It is > is small, fast and handles system resources conservatively. Features > include being able to apply filters, use diffing and set a custom output > format in order to achieve the best results. changed > - License: Since neither the web site nor readme contains a license statement, > perhaps this could be requested of the upstream (since each source file > includes a GPLv2+ header). I will get in touch with upstream about the license issue. (In reply to comment #4) > Additionally, there is no need to BuildRequire: glibc-devel. Thats always > pulled in by gcc, which is in the base set of packages you can assume are > present. fixed > cvs done. thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review