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=707885 Marcela MaÅlÃÅovà <mmaslano@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Marcela MaÅlÃÅovà <mmaslano@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-05-26 11:39:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #1) > > My fist rubygem review, so be patient. > > > > I suppose it's okay to define also other paths in 'gem install' than those > > stated in guidelines. -> --bindir .%{_bindir} > > This avoids struggle with moving binaries and setting execution bits etc, so it > is the recommended approach. > > > > > You don't own: %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ ,which you should own > > according guidelines. > > I own %{geminstdir} which is the same I hope > Should be fixed in packaging guidelines. > > > > > Rpmlint is complaining. > > rpmlint rubygem-bson-1.3.1-1.fc16.src.rpm > > rubygem-bson.src: W: invalid-url Source1: bson-tests.tgz > > This is custom archive with files necessary to execute the test suite. > Ok, but it's ugly. > > rubygem-bson.noarch: W: no-documentation > > Documentation is in subpackage. > > > rubygem-bson.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary b2json > > rubygem-bson.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary j2bson > > No manual pages. It is not common for rubygems to contains manual pages :/ resolvedeps-f16 ~/Downloads/rubygem-bson-1.3.1-1.fc16.noarch.rpm Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok. 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