Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=948345 Kalev Lember <kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #14 from Kalev Lember <kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx> --- And the review checklist for mozjs17-17.0.0-1.src.rpm: + OK ! needs attention rpmlint output: $ rpmlint mozjs17 \ mozjs17-devel \ mozjs17-debuginfo-17.0.0-1.x86_64.rpm \ mozjs17-17.0.0-1.src.rpm mozjs17.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US superset -> super set, super-set, supersede mozjs17.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libmozjs-17.0.so /lib64/libplds4.so mozjs17.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libmozjs-17.0.so /lib64/libplc4.so mozjs17.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libmozjs-17.0.so /lib64/libdl.so.2 mozjs17.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libmozjs-17.0.so /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 mozjs17.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary js17 mozjs17-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation mozjs17.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US superset -> super set, super-set, supersede mozjs17.src:55: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} mozjs17.src:55: W: macro-in-comment %{_bindir} 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings. + rpmlint warnings are harmless and can be ignored + The package is named according to Fedora 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 package contains the license file (LICENSE) + Spec file is written in American English + Spec file is legible + Upstream sources match sources in the srpm. md5sum: 20b6f8f1140ef6e47daa3b16965c9202 mozjs17.0.0.tar.gz 20b6f8f1140ef6e47daa3b16965c9202 Download/mozjs17.0.0.tar.gz + The package builds in koji n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed + BuildRequires look sane n/a The spec file handles locales properly + ldconfig in %post and %postun + Package does not bundle copies of system libraries n/a Package isn't relocatable + Package owns all the 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 + Header files should be in -devel n/a Static libraries should be in -static n/a Library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package + -devel must require the fully versioned base + Packages should not contain libtool .la files n/a Proper .desktop file handling + Doesn't own files or directories already owned by other packages + Filenames are valid UTF-8 Looks good! Please take a look at comment #13 to fix the dist tag before importing and possibly split the -libs subpackage out. (I'll be happy to sanity check the subpackage split again if you want me to, but we can move forward with the git repo creation here I think.) 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=S3bfDBAnVN&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review