Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: comps-extras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225652 katzj@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review- |fedora-review? ------- Additional Comments From katzj@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-05 16:38 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > rpmlint output: > W: comps-extras no-url-tag Yep, there's not one. > W: comps-extras no-documentation And there isn't any > Random notes: > * Consider changing the buildroot to > %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) Sure, done. > * URL should be provided for upstream tarball at least, to check against (MUST item) There isn't an upstream tarball location. The upstream _are_ the packages that are built. > * GPL may not be a very appropriate license for a set of PNG images It's not normal, but it's fine. > * Change make to "make %{?_smp_mflags}" Given that there's nothing actually done, this doesn't actually make a difference > * Change %defattr(-,root,root) to %defattr(-,root,root,-) Sure > * Packages puts files in /usr/share/pixmaps without owning that directory or > depending on any packages that owns it (blocker). /usr/share/pixmaps is owned by the filesystem package. I'm pretty sure we don't have things requiring it > * Better add extra slash at the end of %{_datadir}/pixmaps/comps to show it's a > directory: %{_datadir}/pixmaps/comps/ One better; added the directory as %dir and then the files underneath. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review