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=467419 --- Comment #9 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michel.sylvan@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-09 10:52:28 EDT --- Ah, my mistake. I might have been accidentally using the F-10 version of mingw32-fontconfig (from the MinGW test repo) together with the rest of the already-merged Rawhide stack. I've been unwell for the past few days too, so sorry for the delay. MUST - rpmlint manpage-not-gzipped: pango-querymodules.1 this should probably not be packaged, as MinGW developers should have the docs from the native pango anyway + package name + spec file name + package guideline-compliant + license complies with guidelines + license field accurate + license file not deleted + spec in US English + spec legible + source matches upstream + builds under >= 1 archs, others excluded + build dependencies complete N/A locales handled using %find_lang, no %{_datadir}/locale N/A library -> ldconfig N/A relocatable: give reason + own all directories + no dupes in %files + permission + %clean RPM_BUILD_ROOT + macros used consistently + Package contains code + static in -static + if contains *.pc, req pkgconfig + clean buildroot before install + filenames UTF-8 SHOULD - if license text missing, ask upstream to include it - desc and summary contain translations if available ? package build in mock on all architectures + package functioned as described + scriplets are sane + other subpackages should require versioned base + if main pkg is development-wise, pkgconfig can go in main package + require package not files -- 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