[Bug 480754] Review Request: udev-extras - extra rules and tools for udev

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=480754





--- Comment #3 from Matthias Clasen <mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx>  2009-01-20 10:16:22 EDT ---
package name: ok
spec file name: ok
packaging guidelines: ok
license: ok
license field: from a brief look, it appears that probe-modem is GPLv2, while 
  the rest is GPLv2+. Might just be an oversight, worth checking with dcbw. If
  it is not, the license field needs to reflect that
license file: ok
spec language: ok
spec readable: ok
upstream sources: should add a comment explaining where to get the sources
buildable: ok
excludearch: ok
build deps: need to add glib2-devel, libusb-devel, libxslt
locales: ok
shared libs: n/a
relocatable: n/a
directory ownership: ok
duplicate files: ok
permissions: ok
%clean: ok
macro use: ok
permissible content: ok
large docs: ok
%doc content: ok
header files: n/a
static libs: n/a
pc files: n/a
shared libs: n/a
devel package: n/a
la files: ok
gui: n/a
file ownership: ok
%install: ok, though I don't see why you create sbindir if you don't install
any content there ?
utf8 filenames: ok


summary:
- fix build deps
- clarify license
- add source comment

-- 
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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]