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=570842 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-04-02 08:05:10 EDT --- All mostly good. A few very minor rpmlint that need to be fixed. Removal of empty file and the tabs issue. Other that that it all looks good. APPROVED! + rpmlint output $ rpmlint sugar-labyrinth.spec sugar-labyrinth-8-1.fc12.src.rpm sugar-labyrinth-8-1.fc12.noarch.rpm sugar-labyrinth.spec:6: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities sugar-labyrinth.spec:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 12) sugar-labyrinth.src: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities sugar-labyrinth.src:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 12) sugar-labyrinth.noarch: W: non-standard-group Sugar/Activities sugar-labyrinth.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/sugar/activities/Labyrinth.activity/port/TODO 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. + package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines + specfile name matches the package base name + package should satisfy packaging guidelines + license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora + license matches the actual package license + latest version packaged + %doc includes license file + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible + upstream sources match sources in the srpm 381604d0011554469f1c93884e723878 labyrinth-8.xo + package successfully builds on at least one architecture tested using koji scratch build + BuildRequires list all build dependencies + %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/* n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun+ does not use Prefix: /usr n/a package owns all directories it creates n/a no duplicate files in %files + Package perserves timestamps on install + %defattr line + %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT + consistent use of macros + package must contain code or permissible content n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage + files marked %doc should not affect package n/a header files should be in -devel n/a static libraries should be in -static n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig' n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel n/a devel must require the fully versioned base + packages should not contain libtool .la files n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file + packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages + %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc. + filenames must be valid UTF-8 Optional: n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if available + reviewer should build the package in mock/koji n/a the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures n/a review should test the package functions as described + scriptlets should be sane n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel + shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review