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=818769 Michael Cronenworth <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Michael Cronenworth <mike@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-05-06 21:36:13 EDT --- $ md5sum ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/orc-0.4.16.tar.gz e482932e544c847761449b106ecbc483 /home/michael/rpmbuild/SOURCES/orc-0.4.16.tar.gz $ wget --quiet http://code.entropywave.com/download/orc/orc-0.4.16.tar.gz -O - | md5sum e482932e544c847761449b106ecbc483 - $ rpmlint SPECS/mingw-orc.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint SRPMS/mingw-orc-0.4.16-1.fc17.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/mingw64-orc-0.4.16-1.fc16.noarch.rpm RPMS/noarch/mingw64-orc-compiler-0.4.16-1.fc16.noarch.rpm mingw64-orc-compiler.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. + OK ! Needs to be looked into / Not applicable [+] Compliant with generic Fedora Packaging Guidelines [+] Source package name is prefixed with 'mingw-' [+] Spec file starts with %{?mingw_package_header} [+] BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] BuildRequires: mingw64-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] Spec file contains %package sections for both mingw32 and mingw64 packages [+] Binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are noarch [+] Spec file contains %{?mingw_debug_package} after the %description section [+] Uses one of the macros %mingw_configure, %mingw_cmake, or %mingw_cmake_kde4 to configure the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to build the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to install the package [/] If package contains translations, the %mingw_find_lang macro must be used [+] No binary package named mingw-$pkgname is generated [+] Libtool .la files are not bundled [+] .def files are not bundled [+] Man pages which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Info files which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Provides of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal [+] Requires of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal The rpmlint warning about no docs can be ignored as the subpackage depends on the main package. Looks good. Approved! -- 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