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: eterm - a color vt102 terminal emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182173 ed@xxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO| |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From ed@xxxxxxx 2006-10-01 23:22 EST ------- Hi Terje, the license issue does appear to be cleaned up. The no-money one is gone but the LGPL-ed bits remain. I'm no lawyer but it seems OK to link together the LGPL-ed parts with BSD code. There are some suspicious bits such as: 1) literally hundreds of "pointer targets ... differ in signedness" warnings which are worrisome but perhaps ignorable 2) there appear to be some missing BuildRequires and/or some missing functionality such as: checking for Etwin support... checking for Tw_Open in -lTw... no configure: WARNING: *** Twin support has been disabled because libTw was not found *** and I think libXmu-devel needs to be a BR since I don't see how it gets pulled in by any of the other BRs. Please take a look. In any case, the remaining review items are: + source matches upstream + license now appears to be OK and is correctly included + builds on FC5 i386 + rpmlint reports no errors or warnings + package and spec naming OK + spec is legible + builds on FC5 i386 + no locales + shared libs OK + not relocatable + dir ownership looks good + no file dupes + permissions OK + has %clean + consistent use of macros + code not content (although there are a number of background pixmaps that could be split off into a separate package if one desires) + docs are small and not needed for execution + no static, *.la, or devel libs + no headers or pkgconfig + has desktop file with desktop-file-install which appears sane It'll be easy enough to sort out the BuildRequires with mock as soon as libast is in Extras so we can leave that for later. And I don't see any remaining blockers so its 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