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=524107 --- Comment #13 from Jon Stanley <jonstanley@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-06 21:16:12 EDT --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License OK - License field in spec matches NO - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English NO (see notes) - Spec is legible. OK- Sources match upstream md5sum: $ md5sum qbrew-0.4.1.tar.gz ../SOURCES/qbrew-0.4.1.tar.gz bf5009cf5ce5f3ea5069161012966cf7 qbrew-0.4.1.tar.gz bf5009cf5ce5f3ea5069161012966cf7 ../SOURCES/qbrew-0.4.1.tar.gz OK - Package needs ExcludeArch OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang N/A - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) OK - Package is code or permissible content. N/A- Doc subpackage needed/used. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. N/A - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. N/A- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun N/A - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig N/A - .so files in -devel subpackage. N/A - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} N/A - .la files are removed. OK - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. NO - No rpmlint output. qbrew.src:84: W: macro-in-%changelog doc qbrew.src:85: W: macro-in-%changelog doc qbrew.src:90: W: macro-in-%changelog doc You can't include macros (%doc) in the changelog without escaping them - i.e. %%doc. OK - final provides and requires are sane: SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1732086 OK - Should function as described.1 OK - Should have sane scriptlets. N/A - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version N/A - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews) Notes: 1. Include a blank line between versions of a changelog entry. As such from one of my packages: * Fri Feb 20 2009 Jon Stanley <jonstanley@xxxxxxxxx> - 0.914-4 - Fix *.ttf to *.otf * Fri Feb 20 2009 Jon Stanley <jonstanley@xxxxxxxxx> - 0.914-3 - Remove comments from spec - Something else - Something 3 2. Include the LICENSE file as %doc (as well as in addition to where it already is if it's actually needed by the help) Just fix these things and it should be good! -- 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