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: libglade https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198244 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-10-01 22:36 EST ------- So, really it's just the undefined-non-weak-symbol thing. I'll go ahead and approve, but it would be good to at least check if it's possible to fix that. * source files match upstream: 38b2e2cfd813783fe157617813bfe3b3 libglade-0.17.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 (the latest version before glade2, that is) * 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: libglade-0.17-17.fc6.x86_64.rpm libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglade = 1:0.17-17.fc6 = /sbin/ldconfig libICE.so.6()(64bit) libSM.so.6()(64bit) libX11.so.6()(64bit) libXext.so.6()(64bit) libXi.so.6()(64bit) libart_lgpl.so.2()(64bit) libaudiofile.so.0()(64bit) libesd.so.0()(64bit) libgdk-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_imlib.so.1()(64bit) libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libglib-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libgnome.so.32()(64bit) libgnomesupport.so.0()(64bit) libgnomeui.so.32()(64bit) libgtk-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libxml.so.1()(64bit) libglade-devel-0.17-17.fc6.x86_64.rpm libglade-devel = 1:0.17-17.fc6 = /bin/sh /usr/bin/env gnome-libs-devel >= 1.4.1.2 libglade = 1:0.17-17.fc6 libglade-gnome.so.0()(64bit) libglade.so.0()(64bit) libxml-devel >= 1.8.16 pkgconfig * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * shared libraries present; ldconfig is called as necessary. Unversioned .so files are in the -devel subpackage. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets are OK (ldconfig) * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * headers in -devel subpackage. * pkgconfig file in -devel subpackage; pkgconfig is a dependency. * 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