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=691027 Michel Alexandre Salim <michel+fdr@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(michel+fdr@sylves | |tre.me) | --- Comment #17 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michel+fdr@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2011-04-04 17:11:03 EDT --- Hi Hushan, Almost done! Several small niggling issues: - description is not properly indented. If you use Emacs, adding an empty line between %description and the first line of the text, and then putting your cursor anywhere on the text and pressing Esc-q should fix it; then remove the extra line - rename https to HTTPS in the description - also, are you planning to build for RHEL? If not, there are some items that can be removed: - BuildRoot declaration - %clean section - the cleaning of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT at the beginning of %install (see review below for details) Everything else checks out; post an updated build and I'll approve it and sponsor you. Do you already have a Fedora Account? Let me know your username. #+TODO: TODO(t) WAIT(w@/!) FAIL(f@) | DONE(d) N/A(n) * TODO Review [90%] - [X] Names [2/2] - [X] Package name - [X] Spec name - [X] Package version [2/2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning - [X] Version number http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Version_Tag - [X] Release tag http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Release_Tag http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages - [X] Meets [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines][guidelines]] - [X] Source files match upstream $ sha1sum n2n-2.0.1.tar.bz2 ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/n2n-2.0.1.tar.bz2 1a7f87c6f7434220fa60a700818a4c3c9220c276 n2n-2.0.1.tar.bz2 1a7f87c6f7434220fa60a700818a4c3c9220c276 /home/michel/rpmbuild/SOURCES/n2n-2.0.1.tar.bz2 - [X] [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries][No bundled libraries]] - [X] License [4/4] - [X] License is Fedora-approved - [X] No licensing conflict - [X] License field accurate - [X] License included iff packaged by upstream - [X] rpmlint [2/2] - [X] on src.rpm n2n.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US https -> HTTP => I'd suggest spelling it "HTTPS" n2n.src: W: invalid-url Source0: n2n-2.1.0.tar.bz2 => ignore this; SVN checkout 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. - [X] on x86_64.rpm n2n.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US https -> HTTP 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. - [-] Language & locale [2/3] - [X] Spec in US English - [-] Spec legible - [X] Use %find_lang to handle locale files N/A - [X] Build [3/3] - [X] Koji results - [X] BRs complete - [X] Directory ownership - [X] Spec inspection [8/8] - [X] No duplicate files - [X] File permissions - [X] Filenames must be UTF-8 - [X] no BuildRoot ([[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag][except if targeting EPEL5]]) - [X] No %clean section (except RHEL: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean) - [X] RHEL: %buildroot cleaned on %install - [X] Macro usage consistent - [X] Documentation [1/1] - [X] %doc files are non-essential -- 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