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=542740 Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #29 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2009-12-04 05:29:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #28) > "The patch still needs a comment in the spec file." Not sure what you want > there, but I added a note in the changelog. I mean this # Patch makefile to build a shared library Patch: f2c-20090411.patch Also, the patch backup would better reflect the patch by naming it .sharedlib instead of .tim. - I think the devel package still has to require %{name} = %{version}-%{release}. Are there any pieces of software that don't use f2c, only the libraries..? Then again, I never have used f2c. ** rpmlint output: f2c.x86_64: E: devel-dependency f2c-devel f2c-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation f2c-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libf2c.so.0.22 exit@xxxxxxxxxxx 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. These are all OK. ** MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. OK MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. OK MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. N/A MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. OK MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package that owns the directory. OK MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK MUST: Debuginfo package is complete. OK MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK MUST: Clean section exists. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. N/A MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. OK 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 ending in .so must go in a -devel package. OK MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. OK MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. N/A MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK The package has been 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