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=656186 Volker FrÃhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Volker FrÃhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> 2011-02-02 13:14:18 EST --- [+] Good [x] Needs work [0] Does not apply MUST: ===== [+] Naming according to the Package Naming Guidelines [+] Spec file matches base package name [+] Packaging guidelines met [+] License approved for Fedora [+] License field in spec matches [+] License file included, if source package includes it [+] Spec in American English [+] Spec is legible [+] rpmlint: [makerpm@fedora13 SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/drupal6-mimedetect-1.3-3.fc13.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/drupal6-mimedetect-1.3-3.fc13.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [+] Sources match upstream md5sum: cb675a6eb6a75a332b8aa23e0b6501cb [+] Builds into binary RPMs on at least one primary architecture: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2757803 [0] ExcludeArch is specified and commented: [0] All build dependencies listed [0] The spec file handles locales properly [0] Calls ldconfig for its shared libraries [0] No bundled system libraries [0] Stated as relocatable package [+] Owns all its directories or requires packages that do [+] No file listing duplicates [+] File permissions correct [+] Consistent use of macros [+] Code or permissible content [0] Large documentation in -doc subpackage [+] No runtime dependency of files listed as %doc [0] Header files in -devel subpackage [0] Static files in -static subpackage [0] Library files without suffix in -devel subpackage [0] Devel-package requires base package [0] No .la libtool archives [0] GUI application includes properly installed %{name}.desktop file [+] No files or directories owned, that other packages own [+] Filenames in packages are UTF-8 SHOULD: ======= [0] Query upstream if no license text is included [+] Package builds in mock: (epel-6-x86_64) [0] Scriptlets are sane, if used [0] Subpackages other than -devel should require base package (versioned) [0] pkgconfig files in -devel subpackage [0] Dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself [0] Contain man pages, where they make sense I didn't try whether it works. NOTE: ===== Please remove the name from the summary. Files can be simplified to: ... %doc LICENSE.txt %{name}-fedora-README.txt README.txt %{drupaldir}/modules/mimedetect %exclude %{drupaldir}/modules/mimedetect/*.txt %dir is only necessary in the other packages, because there are translations. This package doesn't have any. Nevertheless, it is not wrong. The chmod is not necessary, as I said before. If the permissions are right, they are right. -------- 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