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=489803 --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-15 21:51:45 EDT --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. See below - License See below - License field in spec matches See below - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 7a3766e354c31513ff6d7859a4b2c1b8 libserial-0.5.2.tar.gz 7a3766e354c31513ff6d7859a4b2c1b8 libserial-0.5.2.tar.gz.orig OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun OK - .so files in -devel subpackage. OK - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} OK - .la files are removed. OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) OK - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag Issues: 1. It's not entirely clear what the license should be here. ;) Some of the source files have: "Copyright: See COPYING file that comes with this distribution" which in fedora implies the License tag should be "GPL+" SerialPort.cpp and SerialPort.h say GPLv2+ It's probibly best to talk to upstream and add a header to all the source files with their intended license. 2. Non blocker, but there are some doxygen warnings you might want to mention to upsteam: Warning: Tag `CGI_NAME' at line 573 of file doxygen.conf has become obsolete. To avoid this warning please update your configuration file using "doxygen -u" ...(and a few more) -- 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