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=171993 Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #95 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-06 12:25:53 EDT --- == REVIEW == - rpmlint checks return: mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_callstack_ldflags.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_f77env.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_graphics.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_help.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_log.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_log_postlib.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_mpianim.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_mpicheck.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_mpilog.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_mpitrace.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpe_nolog.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpicc.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpicxx.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpif77.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpif90.conf mpich2-libs.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/mpich2-64/mpixxx_opts.conf Please make those files be %config(noreplace), so if the user makes local changes, they aren't overwritten on an update. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (MIT) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (41d6f6ce1034ecec5c14fb03592730ae2dd071e5) However, your Source0: URL is wrong, it should be : http://www.mcs.anl.gov/research/projects/mpich2/downloads/tarballs/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file Show me a spec with the two items I noted resolved and I will approve this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review