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=517511 Parag AN(पराग) <panemade@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-14 09:30:11 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i686). koji Build =>http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1605052 + rpmlint is silent for RPM and SRPM. + source files match upstream url 79bd974d151cc6923b38cece4f563bc09cb9eb19 Parse-ExuberantCTags-1.01.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=21, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.03 usr 0.00 sys + 0.04 cusr 0.00 csys = 0.07 CPU) + Package perl-Parse-ExuberantCTags-1.01-1.fc12.i686=> Provides: ExuberantCTags.so perl(Parse::ExuberantCTags) = 1.01 Requires: libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) perl >= 0:5.006001 perl(XSLoader) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rtld(GNU_HASH) APPROVED. -- 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