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=668639 Pierre-YvesChibon <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Pierre-YvesChibon <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2011-01-18 03:48:10 EST --- [OK] rpmlint must be run on every package. Errors are spelling-errors and invalid Source0, all can be ignored here [OK] The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. It follows http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy#Naming [OK] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [OK] The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. It respects the information provided on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FontsPolicy and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template [OK] The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [OK] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. License is OFL [OK] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [OK] The spec file must be written in American English. [OK] The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [N/A] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. source from the src.rpm: 119833a4e1c682096c8effb6da18e2ef I can regenerate this source tarball, but the script made to retrieve them is clean [OK] The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. Built on F14-x86_64 [N/A] If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. [OK] All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. [N/A] The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden. [N/A] Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files(not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [N/A] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [N/A] If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. [OK] A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. This is taken care of by the macro [OK] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. This is taken care of by the macro [OK] Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. This is taken care of by the macro [OK] Each package must consistently use macros. [OK] The package must contain code, or permissable content. [N/A[ Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [OK] If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. [N/A] Header files must be in a -devel package. [N/A] Static libraries must be in a -static package. [N/A] If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [N/A] In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}. [N/A] Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. [N/A] Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. [OK] Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [OK] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. So this package is APPROVED. -- 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