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=526426 Thomas Fitzsimmons <fitzsim@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #13 from Thomas Fitzsimmons <fitzsim@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-12-02 02:01:10 EDT --- $ rpmlint libgle-3.1.0-3.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/i586/libgle-3.1.0-3.i586.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/i586/libgle-devel-3.1.0-3.i586.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/i586/libgle-debuginfo-3.1.0-3.i586.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. There's a trailing space at the end of the second BuildRequires line. Personally I prefer one BuildRequires line per requirement. What's the reason for the mesa-libGL-devel requirement in the devel sub-package? Also, shouldn't the base package requirement include the -%{release} component? Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} The trademark in the description has to go: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Trademarks_in_Summary_or_Description $ md5sum SOURCES/gle-3.1.0.tar.gz da5b45c6906343d4a3672c3de35513ad SOURCES/gle-3.1.0.tar.gz $ wget http://www.linas.org/gle/pub/gle-3.1.0.tar.gz --2009-12-01 22:19:05-- http://www.linas.org/gle/pub/gle-3.1.0.tar.gz Resolving www.linas.org... 99.153.64.178 Connecting to www.linas.org|99.153.64.178|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 806861 (788K) [application/x-gzip] Saving to: `gle-3.1.0.tar.gz' 100%[======================================>] 806,861 112K/s in 7.6s 2009-12-01 22:19:14 (104 KB/s) - `gle-3.1.0.tar.gz' saved [806861/806861] $ md5sum gle-3.1.0.tar.gz da5b45c6906343d4a3672c3de35513ad gle-3.1.0.tar.gz Other than the issues noted above everything from the Review Guidelines is fine. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines I built the packages in mock on i586. They install properly and I tested them against my NanoEngineer-1 packages. I'm going to approve this. Please make the suggested fixes before building the package into Rawhide. -- 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