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: ogdi - Open Geographic Datastore Interface https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222039 pertusus@xxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From pertusus@xxxxxxx 2007-02-24 14:21 EST ------- in main package %files, there is no need of * in %exclude %{_libdir}/%{name}/liblodbc.so* Otherwise * rpmlint output ignorable W: ogdi-odbc no-documentation W: ogdi-tcl no-documentation * follow packaging and naming guidelines * license acceptable, with a license file summarizing the conditions for the source files * sane provides (I consider those .so provides bogus, but that's common) Provides: libadrg.so libdtcanada.so libdted.so libdtusa.so libgdal.so libogdi.so.3 libremote.so librpf.so libskeleton.so libvrf.so Provides: liblodbc.so Provides: libecs_tcl.so * match upstream: 193da3f154985d37bb5aaa886e78f650 ogdi-3.2.0.beta1.tar.gz 029a8cdcd36bee73df92196ee769040e ogdi.pdf * library packaged rightly (no .la, devel stuff in -devel, right Requires for -devel) * %files section right APPROVED The source file timestamps are not the same than what I get with spectool -g. I get Feb 24 18:48 ogdi-3.2.0.beta1.tar.gz Nov 3 2000 ogdi.pdf while in the SRPM, there is Feb 24 19:00 ../SOURCES/ogdi-3.2.0.beta1.tar.gz Nov 27 2003 ../SOURCES/ogdi.pdf Do you need to be sponsored? -- 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