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=479835 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-25 15:50:57 EDT --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. See below - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (LGPLv2+) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: ca5412b7515d8901714ab7892323adb6 log4c-1.2.1.tar.gz ca5412b7515d8901714ab7892323adb6 log4c-1.2.1.tar.gz.orig See below - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun OK - .so files in -devel subpackage. OK - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} See below - .la files are removed. OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. See below - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. No need for a %check section if there is nothing in it is there? 2. Please change the Source url to match the sourceurl guidelines for sourceforge projects? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL 3. Please use a consistent type of macro... either $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot}, but not both. As a side note, I don't personally think it's worth it to macroize things like mv or mkdir, but thats up to you. 4. Please remove .la files, don't %exclude them. excluding has weird effects sometimes. 5. Looks like you might be missing a BuildRequires... from the build.log: checking for EXPAT - version >= 1.95.1... no *** Could not run EXPAT test program, checking why... *** The test program failed to compile or link. See the file config.log for the *** exact error that occured. This usually means EXPAT was incorrectly installed *** or that you have moved EXPAT since it was installed. In the latter case, you *** may want to edit the expat-config script: '' *** Log4C will still run without EXPAT--it uses some bundled *** lex/yacc code to parse the configuration file 6. rpmlint says: log4c.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/liblog4c.so.3.1.0 exit@xxxxxxxxxxx log4c-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation You might bring up the first to upstream, the second can be ignored. 7. Since your devel subpackage puts a file under /usr/share/aclocal, you probibly need to add a Requires: automake to the devel subpackage. -- 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