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=225945 Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keywords| |Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|RAWHIDE | --- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2009-03-23 10:10:57 EDT --- .. Not so fast! I didn't do the review yet, or approve the package! - Please use %configure instead of ./configure. If you %global _sbindir /sbin you can use plain %configure and %{_sbindir}/* in the files section. The review as follows: - source files match upstream: * Tarball matches upstream, but MUST: Source URL is missing! X package meets naming and versioning guidelines. X specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. X dist tag is present. X build root is correct. X license field matches the actual license. X license is open source-compatible. - license text included in package. MUST: Missing from documentation: AUTHORS ChangeLog COPYING NEWS X latest version is being packaged. X BuildRequires are proper. X compiler flags are appropriate. X %clean is present. X package builds in mock. X package installs properly. X debuginfo package looks complete. X rpmlint is silent. X final provides and requires are sane. X no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. X owns the directories it creates. X doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. X no duplicates in %files. X file permissions are appropriate. X no scriptlets present. X code, not content. X documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. X %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. X no headers. X no pkgconfig files. X no libtool .la droppings. X no desktop files Fix the above and I'll approve the 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