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=564518 Nathaniel McCallum <nathaniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, | |nathaniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Nathaniel McCallum <nathaniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-06-15 11:52:15 EDT --- [ OK ] specfiles match: [ OK ] source files match upstream: [ OK ] package meets naming and versioning guidelines. [ OK ] spec is properly named, cleanly written, and uses macros consistently. [ OK ] dist tag is present. [ FAIL ] build root is correct. Use: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) [ FAIL ] license field matches the actual license. License appears to actually be MIT, not GPLv2+ [ OK ] license is open source-compatible. [ FAIL ] license text included in package. Please include a LICENSE file in %doc [ FAIL ] latest version is being packaged. 2.3.1 is available, does it build against Fedora's monodevelop? [ FAIL ] BuildRequires are proper. One dep per line is preferred. [ OK ] compiler flags are appropriate. [ OK ] %clean is present. [ ?? ] package builds in mock. [ OK ] package installs properly. [ OK ] debuginfo package looks complete. [ FAIL ] rpmlint is silent. monodevelop-python.src:50: E: files-attr-not-set monodevelop-python.src:10: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 4, tab: line 10) monodevelop-python.x86_64: E: no-binary monodevelop-python.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib monodevelop-python.x86_64: W: no-documentation monodevelop-python-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation Put %defattr(-,root,root,-) under %files devel Include LICENSE in both packages Fix whitespace "E: no-binary" can probably be ignored. [ OK ] final provides and requires are sane [ OK ] %check is present and all tests pass: [ OK ] no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. [ FAIL ] owns the directories it creates. You should probably do: %dir %{_libdir}/monodevelop/AddIns/PyBinding [ OK ] doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. [ OK ] no duplicates in %files. [ OK ] file permissions are appropriate. [ OK ] scriptlets match those on ScriptletSnippets page. [ OK ] code, not content. [ OK ] documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. [ OK ] %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. [ OK ] no headers. [ OK ] no pkgconfig files. [ OK ] no libtool .la droppings. [ OK ] desktop files valid and installed properly. -- 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