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=512217 --- Comment #32 from Jochen Schmitt <jochen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-22 15:41:39 EDT --- Good: + Could download of upstream tar ball via spectool -g + Package tar ball matches with upstream (md5sum: 9587a8d8680c73833c7c55b9e1fd58aa) + Local build works fine + Rpmlint is silent for source rpm * Scratch build on koji works fine. * Static liraries will been removed. * Provides/Obsoltes statement for renaming geanyvc subpackage seems ok. Bad: - I dislike the creation of the metapackage. So please remove all Req. to the supackages from the main package - I have founds Requires geany = %{version}. this should replaced into Requires geany >= %{reg_geany_ver} - Rpmlint complaints binary rpms: geany-plugins.x86_64: W: no-documentation geany-plugins-common.x86_64: W: no-documentation 12 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. - It's better to wrote Requires: geany-plugins-common = %{version}-%{release} instead of Requires: geany-plugins-common = %{version} -- 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