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=490397 --- Comment #5 from Alex Lancaster <alexl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-17 01:53:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #2) > > Here are the main issues: > > > > 1. missing "Requires: pkgconfig" > > 2. probably should get some feedback from current gmime maintainer (although > > not a 100% requirement, it would be better to get feedback) > > 1. fixed > 2. Am I misreading packagedb? Are you not the owner of the current gmime > package? I am not the current name. My FAS username is "alexlan". "alexl" is Alexander Larsson. > (In reply to comment #3) > > Additional MUST that was missing: > > > > [x] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an > > architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in > > ExcludeArch. > > I believe you mean "+" ?? Unless you found that one arch didn't build? Yes, sorry, that should have been "+". > Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~bjohnson/compat-gmime.spec > SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~bjohnson/compat-gmime-2.2.23-4.fc11.src.rpm > > * Mon Mar 16 2009 Bernard Johnson <bjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> - 2.2.23-4 > - add Requires: pkgconfig to -devel package Thanks, I'll review that in a second. -- 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