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=523326 Christoph Wickert <cwickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Christoph Wickert <cwickert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-09-15 19:44:57 EDT --- I got a 404 on the spec and realized you already changed it. Fine. REVIEW FOR e5168e16cd03c7f4bd3d01358a098056 gnome-applets-window-picker-0.5.6-2.fc12.src.rpm FIX - MUST: $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/gnome-applets-window-picker-* gnome-applets-window-picker.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 3) gnome-applets-window-picker-debuginfo.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long This package provides debug information for package gnome-applets-window-picker. 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. there is nothing we can do about the latter, but please fix the first one, although it's just cosmetic. OK - MUST: named according to the Package Naming Guidelines OK - MUST: spec file name matches the base package %{name} OK - MUST: package meets the Packaging Guidelines OK - MUST: Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines: GPLv3 OK - MUST: License field in spec file matches the actual license OK - MUST: license file included in %doc OK - MUST: spec is in American English OK - MUST: spec is legible OK - MUST: sources match the upstream source by MD5 aeda4b063a0233920b0186bca4495fef OK - MUST: successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on x86_64 OK - MUST: no ExcludeArch. OK - MUST: all build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. OK - MUST: handles locales properly with %find_lang N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. OK - MUST: owns all directories that it creates OK - MUST: no duplicate files in the %files listing OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly, includes %defattr(...) OK - MUST: package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT OK - MUST: consistently uses macros OK - MUST: package contains code, or permissable content N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A - MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. OK - MUST: packages does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. OK - MUST: at the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT OK - MUST: all filenames valid UTF-8 SHOULD Items: OK - SHOULD: Source package includes license text(s) as a separate file. N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. OK - SHOULD: builds in mock. OK - SHOULD: compiles and builds into binary rpms on all supported architectures. OK - SHOULD: functions as described. OK - SHOULD: scriptlets are sane N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A - SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg N/A - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. Other items: OK - latest stable version OK - SourceURL valid OK - compiler flags honored OK - debuginfo complete OK - Provides: are sane. Issues: Fix - Make is not verbose: make[2]: Entering directory `/home/chris/fedora/rpmbuild/BUILD/window-picker-applet-0.5.6/src' CC task-item.o CC applet.o CC task-list.o CC task-title.o CCLD window-picker-applet Use make %{?_smp_mflags} V=1 Add Requires: gnome-panel because the package only requires gnome-panel-libs currently. IMO you should add ChangeLog to %doc Rename the package, fix these and consider this package 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