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=613697 --- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-07-12 12:22:10 EDT --- + rpmlint output + 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 BSD, and the native package is already in Fedora + license matches the actual package license + %doc includes license file + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible + upstream sources match sources in the srpm + package successfully builds on at least one architecture tried it on x86-64, cross-compiled to i386 n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed + 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 + package owns all directories it creates - no duplicate files in %files %{_mingw32_docdir}/libogg-%{version} is not needed, or if you want to include it, it must be marked %doc + %defattr line n/a %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 + header files should be in -devel this rule is not applicable for mingw32-* packages + static libraries should be in -static this rule is not applicable for mingw32-* packages n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base + packages should not contain libtool .la files this rule is not applicable for mingw32-* packages n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file + packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages + filenames must be valid UTF-8 + use %global instead of %define 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 - the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures - 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 Please fix the docdir thing mentioned above. -- 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