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=461484 --- Comment #12 from Milos Jakubicek <xjakub@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-20 20:13:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) > More a "pong" than a review, I';; be back a bit later: > > rpmlint of twin: > twin.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/twin-0.6.1/setroot.sample > twin.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm > /usr/share/doc/twin-0.6.1/LICENSING.INFO > twin.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/twin-0.6.1/README.twsetroot Ah, forgot to rpmlint again, sorry, fixed. > More serious stuff, I am a bit puzzled by this snipplet from the build log > (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1133537&name=build.log ): [...] > checking for gtk-config... > no [...] > It seems that BR gtk2-devel is not sufficient ? Yeah, gtk-config is in gtk+-devel, thanks for noticing that! New SPEC file: http://mjakubicek.fedorapeople.org/twin/twin.spec New SRPM: http://mjakubicek.fedorapeople.org/twin/twin-0.6.1-2.fc10.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1143787 P.S. The BSD/BSD with advertising issue is just pending releasing new sources from upstream, should be soon (probably without bumping release number), I've modified the licensing info in spec file in advance. -- 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