https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=832504 --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (GPLv2) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. See below - Sources match upstream md5sum: OK - BuildRequires correct See below- Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install See below - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. See below- Package has no duplicate files in %files. See below- Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. See below- Package owns all the directories it creates. See below- Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) See below- No rpmlint output. See below- final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should function as described. OK - Should have sane scriptlets. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. github seems to not be very sourceurl friendly. The current one is giving a 404. Perhaps just do a git checkout (and include comment on how to get that checkout?) 2. Does not seem to build in mock: pe_update.c:79:1: error: conflicting types for 'pe_update' In file included from libdpe.h:22:0, from pe_update.c:20: /builddir/build/BUILD/pesign-0.1/include/libdpe/libdpe.h:81:15: note: previous declaration of 'pe_update' was here make[1]: *** [pe_update.o] Error 1 Fix the build and I can finish this review up. ;) -- 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