Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arj - Archiver for .arj files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205878 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-09-09 12:09 EST ------- This looks quick and simple. The only thing I wonder is whether it might be useful to package up some bits so that the desktops can handle these files. It looks like KDE is already set up to at least recognize these files. * source files match upstream: 48d2275b8a8e6e5adaead8916d008fd3 arj_3.10.22-2.diff.gz f263bf3cf6d42a8b7e85b4fb514336d3 arj-3.10.22.tar.gz * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: arjcrypt.so()(64bit) config(arj) = 3.10.22-1.fc6 unarj = 3.10.22-1.fc6 arj = 3.10.22-1.fc6 = /bin/sh config(arj) = 3.10.22-1.fc6 * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review