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=582463 LI Rui Bin <cheeseli@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |cheeseli@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from LI Rui Bin <cheeseli@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-04-17 03:58:10 EDT --- This review is using the Tibbs checklist as reference from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tibbs/Review_Template = source files match upstream: Using non-trunk snapshot version. + package meets naming and versioning guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. + dist tag is present. *********************** - license field matches the actual license. ./lib/* ./src/IC.c ./src/IC.h are in MIT ./src/uthash.h is in BSD *********************** + license is open source-compatible. + license text included in package. = latest version is being packaged. Using snapshot version. + BuildRequires are proper. + compiler flags are appropriate. + %clean is present. + package builds in Koji. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2122111 + package installs properly. + rpmlint outputs $ rpmlint ./fcitx.spec ./fcitx.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: fcitx-20100410.tar.bz2 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint ./fcitx-3.6.3-1.20100410svn_utf8.fc12.src.rpm fcitx.src: W: invalid-url Source0: fcitx-20100410.tar.bz2 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint ./fcitx-3.6.3-1.20100410svn_utf8.fc14.i686.rpm fcitx.i686: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/fcitx.conf 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. + final provides and requires are sane: $ rpm -qp --provides fcitx-3.6.3-1.20100410svn_utf8.fc14.i686.rpm config(fcitx) = 3.6.3-1.20100410svn_utf8.fc14 fcitx = 3.6.3-1.20100410svn_utf8.fc14 fcitx(x86-32) = 3.6.3-1.20100410svn_utf8.fc14 $ rpm -qp --requires fcitx-3.6.3-1.20100410svn_utf8.fc14.i686.rpm /bin/sh /bin/sh /usr/bin/python /usr/sbin/alternatives /usr/sbin/alternatives config(fcitx) = 3.6.3-1.20100410svn_utf8.fc14 im-chooser libX11.so.6 libXext.so.6 libXft.so.2 libXpm.so.4 libXrender.so.1 libXtst.so.6 libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7) libdbus-1.so.3 libdl.so.2 libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.0) libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.1) libfontconfig.so.1 libfreetype.so.6 libpthread.so.0 libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.1) librt.so.1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets) <= 4.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rtld(GNU_HASH) rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 + no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. (or, if shared libraries are present, make sure ldconfig is run) + owns the directories it creates. + doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Scriptlets are proper. + code, not content. + documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. + %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. + no headers. + no pkgconfig files. + no libtool .la droppings. -- 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