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=226016 Parag AN(पराग) <panemade@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx, | |panemade@xxxxxxxxx AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |panemade@xxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) <panemade@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-09-09 05:03:24 EDT --- Review: koji Build =>http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=164851 + rpmlint output for SRPM and for RPM. libgnomeprint22.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US devel -> delve, devil, revel libgnomeprint22.src:211: W: macro-in-%changelog %{_datadir} libgnomeprint22.src: W: no-buildroot-tag libgnomeprint22.src:15: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 15, tab: line 14) libgnomeprint22.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US devel -> delve, devil, revel libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-clip.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-draft.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-multipage.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/libgnomeprintlpd.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-select.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-rotate.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-frgba.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/libgnomeprintcups.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/transports/libgnomeprint-file.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-zoom.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint-2-2.so.0.1.0 exit@xxxxxxxxxxx libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-reverse.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/transports/libgnomeprint-custom.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-reorder.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/transports/libgnomeprint-lpr.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgnomeprint/2.18.7/modules/filters/libgnomeprint-position.so ['/usr/lib64'] libgnomeprint22.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/libgnomeprint22-2.18.7/NEWS 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 15 errors, 7 warnings. + source files match upstream url (sha1sum) f7c550abacf22f602ca097f9033803bf9d4556de libgnomeprint-2.18.7.tar.bz2 + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present which is not needed now. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + libgnomeprint-2.2.pc file present. + -devel subpackage + no .la files. + translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + ldconfig scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Not a GUI application Suggestions: 1) Maintainer can perform some cosmetic cleanups. 2) Following new changes can be implemented. a) %clean not needed b) cleaning of buildroot at start of %install also not needed -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review