[Bug 755176] Review Request: ghc-mwc-random - Pseudo random number generation library for Haskell

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=755176

Jens Petersen <petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Status Whiteboard|Ready                       |
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+

--- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen <petersen@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-11-23 08:00:37 EST ---
Here is the review:

 +:ok, NA: not applicable

MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint output [1]

ghc-mwc-random.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mersenne -> Mennen
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
ghc-mwc-random.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mersenne ->
Mennen
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
ghc-mwc-random-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mersenne
-> Mennen
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

[+] MUST: package named according to Package Naming Guidelines
[+] MUST: spec file name must match base package %{name} [2]
[+] MUST: meet Packaging Guidelines
[+] MUST: Fedora approved license and Licensing Guidelines
[+] MUST: License field in the package spec file must match actual license. [3]
[+] MUST: include license files in %doc if available in source [4]
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English [5] and legible.
[6]
[+] MUST: source md5sum matches upstream release (from upstream URL)

1eb10b9bb760e587a4827cf8e4309ce3  mwc-random-0.10.0.1.tar.gz

[+] MUST: successfully compile and build into binary rpms on a primary arch [7]

[NA] MUST: if necessary use ExcludeArch for other archs [8]
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[NA] MUST: use %find_lang macro for .po translations [9]
[NA] MUST: packages which store shared library files in the dynamic linker's
default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10]
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [11]
[NA] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review [12]
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [13]
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[14]
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [15]
[+] MUST: consistently use macros [16]
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17]
[NA] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage. [18]
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. [18]
[+] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [19]
[NA] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [20]
[NA] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package. [19]
[+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency [21]
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec. [20]
[NA] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. [22]
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. [23]
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [24]

SHOULD Items:
[+] SHOULD: If upstream source does not include license text file(s), the
packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [25]
[NA] SHOULD: include description and summary translations for supported
Non-English languages, if available. [26]
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [27]
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures. [28]
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [29]

Package is APPROVED.


You can normalize the indentation of the description before building please.

-- 
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



[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]