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: fswebcam - Small webcam app https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222009 wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-01-09 15:22 EST ------- MUST items - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( GPL v2) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source is the latest version, matches upstream, sha1sum 69df690a91dd5902b5fe3d6b5c6a140fe242f002 fswebcam-20070108.tar.gz - package builds in mock for devel/x86_64 - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no scriptlets, static, headers or .pc files - Minor picknick: changelog misses the most current modifications, which triggers a warning from rpmlint when run against the binary package: fswebcam incoherent-version-in-changelog 20061210-1 20070108-1 There are no other complains from rpmlint, either on source or binary SHOULD: - builds in mock without problems - There is no obvious segfault at runtime, but I have no camera to fully test. Please fix the changelog and since your package is a GUI, consider adding a .desktop file (or explain why this would not be needed) -- 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