Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877763 Debarshi Ray <debarshir@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |debarshir@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #2 from Debarshi Ray <debarshir@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Since Igor beat me to it, consider this an unofficial review. * rpmlint complains about no-manual-page-for-binary, install-file-in-docs, invalid-desktopfile, incorrect-fsf-address and macro-in-comment. - install-file-in-docs and invalid-desktopfile (Thanks Mathieu) have been fixed upstream * Package is named according to Package Naming Guidelines. * Spec file matches with base package %{name}. * Package meets Packaging Guidelines. * Package meets Licensing Guidelines. * The License field in the spec file matches the actual license. * License text included in %doc. * Spec file is written in American English. * Spec file is legible. * Sources used to build the package matches upstream source. * Package can be successfully built on atleast one primary architecture. * ExcludeArch is not needed. X It should have a BR on gdk-pixbuf2-devel, not gdk-pixbuf2. * Locales are handled properly using %find_lang. * Package does not contain shared library files. X Pedantically speaking it should have Provides: bundled(libgd). See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries - It must be noted that libgd is not meant to be installed as a system wide shared library. It is just a way for GNOME applications to share widgets and other common code on an ad-hoc basis. * Package is not designed to be relocatable. * Package owns all directories created by it. * Files are not listed more than once in %files. * File permissions are set properly. * Macros are used consistently. * Package contains code. * No need for -doc subpackage. X Files marked as %doc do not affect the runtime behaviour. - You could consider marking %{_docdir}/%{name} as %doc * No need for -static subpackage. * No need for -devel subpackage. * Package does not contain libtool archives. * Package has a %{name}.desktop file. - Problems in %{name}.desktop file have been fixed upstream. (Thanks Mathieu) * Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. * Filenames are valid UTF-8. * Package builds in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4716019 -- 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