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: GraphicsMagick https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200722 panemade@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From panemade@xxxxxxxxx 2006-11-27 02:03 EST ------- Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and RPMS. + source files match upstream. f75d830ca623bf10385b3ad62c48437a GraphicsMagick-1.1.7.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. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. + %doc is small; no -doc subpackage required. + %doc does not affect runtime. + COPYING included in %doc. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + .pc file present. + -devel,-c++, -c++-devel, -perl subpackages exists + as subpackages are packaging .so files post and postun called /sbin/ldconfig + no .la files. + no translations are available + Dose owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + perl subpackage followed perl packagaing. APPROVED. -- 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