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=802161 Kai Tietz <ktietz@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Kai Tietz <ktietz@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-03-16 12:50:07 EDT --- Ok, so the review for the package [ktietz@nike x86_64]$ rpmlint mingw-w64-tools-debuginfo-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc15.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [ktietz@nike x86_64]$ rpmlint mingw-w64-tools-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc15.x86_64.rpm mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, Chaitin mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, Chaitin mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US widl -> wild, wide, will mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.0.999-0.1.trunk.20120124 ['2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc15', '2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124'] mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mingw-w64-widl mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary genidl mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gendef 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. [ktietz@nike x86_64]$ rpmlint mingw-w64-tools-debuginfo-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc15.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [ktietz@nike fd_mingw]$ rpmlint mingw-w64-tools.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [ktietz@nike fd_mingw]$ [ktietz@nike fd_mingw]$ rpmlint mingw-w64-tools mingw-w64-tools-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc16.src.rpm mingw-w64-tools.spec [ktietz@nike fd_mingw]$ rpmlint mingw-w64-tools-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc16.src.rpm mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, Chaitin mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, Chaitin mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gendef -> gender, gen def, gen-def mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US genidl -> genial mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US widl -> wild, wide, will mingw-w64-tools.src: W: file-size-mismatch mingw-w64-src_20120124.tar.bz2 = 104449518, http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/Toolchain%20sources/Automated%20Builds/mingw-w64-src_20120124.tar.bz2 = 33343 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. So I don't see here anything wrong. I checked for the difference in size-mismatch the .md5 check for both packages and they are identical. Might be something caused by SF. The warnings about missing man-pages can be ignored, as those tools don't provide them. The spelling errors are all bogus AFAICS. So from my side of view this package is ok. I agree that the rename of the tools can be done later. -- 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