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: yum-metadata-parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226667 tla@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|tla@xxxxxxxxx |katzj@xxxxxxxxxx Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review- ------- Additional Comments From tla@xxxxxxxxx 2007-02-13 09:50 EST ------- OK - spec filename is %{name}.spec OK - source match upstream md5sum 8cc782b0a6fbca137b133fe6294ce000 yum-metadata-parser-1.0.3.tar.gz OK - Package naming OK - Spec in American English and legible OK - License : GPL OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. - License file (COPYING) is included in %doc OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Buildroot is %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) OK - Package is compiling and building on i386. Comments: * No Licens file in upstream source. rpmlint: [tim@naboo devel]$ rpmlint yum-metadata-parser-1.0.3-1.src.rpm E: yum-metadata-parser no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install [tim@naboo i386]$ rpmlint yum-metadata-parser-1.0.3-1.i386.rpm silent Summery: * rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT should be added to %install -- 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