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=489080 --- Comment #2 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-07 11:57:35 EDT --- = Review = Good: - rpmlint checks return nothing - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPLv2+) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (d991da3fa6f531a1c8b7f6ef764aa13e7e9acbd3) - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - locales handled properly - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - .desktop file OK In fact, the biggest problem (besides the unnecessary information in the %description) wasn't with this package, but with ladspa-swh-plugins. When I went to test this package out to make sure it ran, it didn't start, because the swh plugins it was trying to load were missing symbols. I fixed that package up, it should not have this problem with -15 or later. Also, this app seems to need to run as root. You should probably use consolehelper (from the usermode package) to launch it. (look at liveusb-creator for an example of how to set it up). Show me a SRPM that uses consolehelper and has the description cleaned up and I'll approve this one. -- 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