Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cups-pdf - Extension for creating pdf-Files with CUPS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215292 jeff@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |jeff@xxxxxxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jeff@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-11-13 11:35 EST ------- ! Source url is invalid, should be: http://www.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~vrbehr/cups-pdf/src/%{name}_%{version}.tar.gz * source files match upstream 97b21ab9dc98659bfce17da921ee2790 cups-pdf_2.4.2.tar.gz 97b21ab9dc98659bfce17da921ee2790 cups-pdf_2.4.2.tar.gz.1 * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (fc6 i386). * package installs properly. Print queue gets created and works as advertised. * rpmlint says: E: cups-pdf description-line-too-long "cups-pdf" is a backend script for use with CUPS - the "Common UNIX Printing System" E: cups-pdf description-line-too-long (see more for CUPS under http://www.cups.org/). "cups-pdf" uses the ghostscript pdfwrite E: cups-pdf description-line-too-long This version has been modified to store the PDF files on the Desktop of the user. I won't block the review because of these, but if you could re-wrap the description text before building the packages that'd be great. E: cups-pdf non-readable /usr/lib/cups/backend/cups-pdf 0700 E: cups-pdf non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/cups/backend/cups-pdf 0700 I think that these can be ignored. * %check is not present; There is no test code in the districution. * no shared libraries are present * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets are OK * 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 unversioned .so file * no pkconfig file * no libtool .la droppings. Some minor points: 1) It looks like the PPD file could be gzipped, but since it's only 21K to start with it's not a big deal. 2) Instead of creating the INSTALL.fedora with during %prep I'd include it as a separate source file. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review