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=529375 --- Comment #7 from Josephine Tannhäuser <josephine.tannhauser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-12-21 15:18:57 EDT --- OK - MUST: $ rpmlint emerillon.i686: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/emerillon.schemas emerillon-devel.i686: W: no-documentation OK - MUST: Named according to the Package Naming Guidelines OK - MUST: Spec file name matches the base package %{name} OK - MUST: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines OK - MUST: Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines OK - MUST: License field in spec file matches the actual license OK - MUST: License files included in %doc OK - MUST: Spec is in American English OK - MUST: Spec is legible OK - MUST: Sources match the upstream source by MD5 b8a5a7bf3c54b05be4b1358f285d0d40 OK - MUST: Successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on i686 OK - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. If you want to import this to f12, too, you should do a kojibuild for f12 to see if this will be build on all f12 supported architectures. OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. OK - MUST: Handles locales properly with %find_lang N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. N/A - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager muststate this fact in the request for review. OK - MUST: Owns all directories that it creates OK - MUST: No duplicate files in the %files listing OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly, includes %defattr(...) OK - MUST: Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. NOT OKAY - MUST: Consistently uses macros you mix %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_DIR OK - MUST: Package contains code, or permissable content OK - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package OK - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A - MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. OK - MUST: Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. OK - MUST: At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot}. OK - MUST: All filenames valid UTF-8 SHOULD Items: OK - SHOULD: Source package includes license text(s) as a separate file. N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. OK - SHOULD: Builds in mock. N/A - SHOULD: Functions as described. OK - SHOULD: Scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. OK - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. OK - SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg N/A - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. Other items: OK - latest stable version OK - SourceURL valid OK - Compiler flags ok OK - Debuginfo complete Issues: FIX macro-using correct the macro from $RPM_BUILD_DIR to %{buildroot} Simon, is this package okay? -- 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