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=469569 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-12 00:37:24 EDT --- Yes, this builds fine and rpmlint is silent. The Source0: URL doesn't seem to be correct. I believe you need to remove the "-unix" from the URL; it seems to work after that. You can use "spectool -g *spec" to test your source URLs. There's a copy of the GPL in doc/copying.txt that needs to be included in the package. There is a test suite included; a simple "make check" will run it. It requires build deps on texlive-latex and ImageMagick to run, but it doesn't actually complete. I don't know quite enough about TeX to understand why, though. I think it's worth looking into. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: bcdcd08b0211a05d3de03e9c8bdc80ddc5b6f16e53bab9ba86842368b37fa470 latex2rtf-1.9.19.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. X license text not included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (none). * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: latex2rtf = 1.9.19-2.fc11 latex2rtf(x86-64) = 1.9.19-2.fc11 = /bin/sh ImageMagick info X %check is not present, but there's a test suite in the source. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * scriptlets are OK (texinfo installation). * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la 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