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=539863 Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@xxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |lkundrak@xxxxx AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |lkundrak@xxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@xxxxx> 2009-12-19 10:37:05 EDT --- * Named and versioned in accordance with guidelines * License tag correct, license ok * SPEC file clean and legible * Builds fine in mock * RPMlint silent and happy * Dependencies sane * Source archive matches upstream Nothing that would block the issues, the package is APPROVED A few small suggestions: 1.) You do not need to explicitly require perl(HTML::Entities) It's automatically in by autoreq (you probably still need the rest, as you seem to need specific versions). 2.) You have redundant entries in %files, even RPM complains: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/perl5/Pod/PseudoPod/Checker.pm warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/perl5/Pod/PseudoPod/DocBook.pm There are two solutions to the problem. One is prepending the "%{perl_vendorlib}/Pod/PseudoPod" line with "%doc" so that RPM doesn't automatically add its descendants recursively. Alternatively, you can leave the line as is and remove all its descendants below. -- 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