Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: plexus-container-default-1.0-0.a8.2jpp - Default Plexus Container https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227101 overholt@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|overholt@xxxxxxxxxx |nsantos@xxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From overholt@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-16 11:50 EST ------- Updated spec and SRPM: http://overholt.ca/fedora/plexus-container-default.spec http://overholt.ca/fedora/plexus-container-default-1.0-0.1.a10.1jpp.1.src.rpm (In reply to comment #2) > NO * license text included in package and marked with %doc It's unfortunately not included so this must be ignored. > NO * rpmlint on <this package>.srpm gives no output > - justify warnings if you think they shouldn't be there > > -- > $ rpmlint plexus-container-default-1.0-0.1.a10.1jpp.1.src.rpm > W: plexus-container-default invalid-license Apache Software License and MIT It's actually both so I can't see any way around it. > ?? * package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86 > NO * make sure lines are <= 80 characters > > -- > line 6 in %install is too long > -- Fixed. > NO * use macros appropriately and consistently > - ie. %{buildroot} and %{optflags} vs. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS I think that's fine. -- 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