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=814542 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla <limburgher@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-04-20 12:11:32 EDT --- ood: - rpmlint checks return: See above. Should these last remaining obsoletes warnings not be fixed? lv2.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided lv2-ui(x86-64) lv2-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided lv2-ui-devel(x86-64) Also: lv2-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources Fix. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( ISC ) OK, text in %doc, matches source I also see MIT and CC-AT-SA - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - 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 need for .desktop file - devel package ok - no .la files - post/postun ldconfig ok Fix. - devel requires base package n-v-r Also, I see it's using a local waf, why not BuildRequire waf and use the system waf? -- 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