Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919867 Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Hi, Good: - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPLv3+ and GFDL) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - .desktop file properly installed Needs work: - rpmlint checks return: billiards.x86_64: E: no-binary billiards-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package This is caused by billiards being written completely in lua, this is fine, but the package should be noarch then. Adding: "BuildArch: noarch" to the specfile fixes this. -%makeinstall should not be used except for broken Makefiles, Use "make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}" instead. -The info file being gzipped is done by rpmbuild and this may change to another compression format in the future. You should drop the .gz from the scriptlets (install-info will figure it out itself) and the %files entry should be: %{_infodir}/%{name}.info* So a few small things to fix, but looks good overall. Regards, Hans -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xe02ekm2u6&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review