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=476315 --- Comment #15 from Matthias Clasen <mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-25 23:36:52 EDT --- formal review package name: ok spec file name: ok packaging guidelines: ok license: ok package name: ok spec file name: ok packaging guidelines: ok license: ok license field/file: the license field says GPLv2+, but COPYING is GPLv3. What gives ? spec language: ok spec legible: ok upstream sources: ok buildable: ok excludearch: ok build deps: ok locale handling: ok, but I don't know what that extra grep business is about. Shouldn't be necessary ? ldconfig: ok relocatable: ok directory ownership: ok, but see earlier comment about deps duplicate files: ok permissions: ok %clean: ok macro use: ok permissible content: ok large docs: ok %doc content: ok header files: ok static libs: ok pkgconfig files: ok shared libs: ok devel dep: ok libtool archives: ok gui apps: ok file ownership: ok %install: ok utf8 filenames: ok summary: - clarify license - consider getting rid of grep business around %find_lang - consider adding explicit deps for evo/eds -- 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