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=730851 --- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-08-20 06:34:22 EDT --- Review: + OK ? ISSUE - NA + Package meets naming and packaging guidelines + Spec file matches base package name. + Spec has consistant macro usage. + Meets Packaging Guidelines. + License + License field in spec matches + License file included in package + Spec in American English + Spec is legible. + Sources match upstream md5sum: - Package needs ExcludeArch + BuildRequires correct - Spec handles locales/find_lang - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. + Package is code or permissible content. - Doc subpackage needed/used. + Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig - .so files in -devel subpackage. - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} - .la files are removed. + Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file + Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. + Package has no duplicate files in %files. + Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. + Package owns all the directories it creates. ? No rpmlint output. ^^ Only incorrect-fsf-addresses. Please contact upstream + final provides and requires are sane: == chocolate-doom-1.6.0-1.i686.rpm == Provides: chocolate-doom = 1.6.0-1 chocolate-doom(x86-32) = 1.6.0-1 Requires: libSDL-1.2.so.0 libSDL_mixer-1.2.so.0 libSDL_net-1.2.so.0 libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) libm.so.6 libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libpthread.so.0 libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0) libsamplerate.so.0 libsamplerate.so.0(libsamplerate.so.0.0) rtld(GNU_HASH) == chocolate-doom-1.6.0-1.src.rpm == Provides: Requires: SDL-devel SDL_mixer-devel SDL_net-devel libsamplerate-devel desktop-file-utils == chocolate-doom-debuginfo-1.6.0-1.i686.rpm == Provides: chocolate-doom-debuginfo = 1.6.0-1 chocolate-doom-debuginfo(x86-32) = 1.6.0-1 Requires: SHOULD Items: + Should build in mock. + Should build on all supported archs - Should function as described. + Should have sane scriptlets. - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. ? Should have dist tag ^^ Please consider using the dist tag + Should package latest version - check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews) Issues: 1. The package uses an md5 implementation. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries#Packages_granted_exceptions Please add a provides for it as mentioned on the page. 2. Please consider using the dist tag 3. Please mail upstream requesting them to update the FSF address. The rest looks good :) Thanks, Ankur -- 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