Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947155 Kalev Lember <kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Kalev Lember <kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx> --- Fedora review of mingw-gstreamer1-1.0.6-1.fc18.src.rpm 2013-04-01 + OK ! needs attention rpmlint output: $ rpmlint mingw-gstreamer1-1.0.6-1.fc19.src.rpm \ mingw32-gstreamer1-1.0.6-1.fc19.noarch.rpm \ mingw64-gstreamer1-1.0.6-1.fc19.noarch.rpm \ mingw32-gstreamer1-debuginfo-1.0.6-1.fc19.noarch.rpm \ mingw64-gstreamer1-debuginfo-1.0.6-1.fc19.noarch.rpm mingw-gstreamer1.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US GStreamer -> G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer mingw-gstreamer1.src: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-02 mingw-gstreamer1.src: E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Mon Apr 02 2013 Paweł Forysiuk <tuxator@xxxxx> - 1.0.6-1 mingw32-gstreamer1.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US GStreamer -> G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer mingw32-gstreamer1.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-02 mingw32-gstreamer1.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/mingw32-gstreamer1-1.0.6/COPYING mingw64-gstreamer1.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US GStreamer -> G Streamer, Streamer, Steamer mingw64-gstreamer1.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-02 mingw64-gstreamer1.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/mingw64-gstreamer1-1.0.6/COPYING mingw32-gstreamer1-debuginfo.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-02 mingw32-gstreamer1-debuginfo.noarch: E: debuginfo-without-sources mingw64-gstreamer1-debuginfo.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-02 mingw64-gstreamer1-debuginfo.noarch: E: debuginfo-without-sources 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 10 errors, 3 warnings. + The package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines + The spec file name matches the base package name. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The license field in the spec file matches the actual license + The stated license is the same as the one for the corresponding native Fedora package + The package contains the license file (COPYING) + Spec file is written in American English + Spec file is legible + Upstream sources match sources in the srpm. md5sum: d0797e51a420fca0beb973b9dcda586f gstreamer-1.0.6.tar.xz d0797e51a420fca0beb973b9dcda586f Download/gstreamer-1.0.6.tar.xz + The package builds in koji n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed + BuildRequires look sane + locale handling n/a ldconfig in %post and %postun + Package doesn't bundle copies of system libraries n/a Package isn't relocatable + Package owns all directories it creates + No duplicate files in %files + Permissions are properly set + Consistent use of macros + The package must contain code or permissible content n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage + Files marked %doc should not affect package n/a Header files should be in -devel Not applicable to MinGW packages. n/a Static libraries should be in -static n/a Library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base + Packages must not contain libtool .la files n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file + Directory ownership sane + Filenames are valid UTF-8 Just a small issue that rpmlint caught above: it should be 'Mon Apr 01', not 'Mon Apr 02' in the changelog. Otherwise looks good, but please fix this before importing. APPROVED -- 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=BrRmRBNm8L&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review