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: powertop - power usage tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239883 notting@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |notting@xxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From notting@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-05-11 20:16 EST ------- MUST items: - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines - OK - Spec file matches base package name. - OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. - OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. - OK - License - OK - License field in spec matches - OK - License file included in package - *** *** should include COPYING in doc - Spec in American English - OK - Spec is legible. - OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: - OK - Package needs ExcludeArch - N/A - BuildRequires correct - OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang - N/A - Package is relocatable and has a reason to be. - N/A - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. - OK - Package has a correct %clean section. - OK - Package has correct buildroot - OK - Package is code or permissible content. - OK - Doc subpackage needed/used. - N/A - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - N/A - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. - N/A - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun - N/A - .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig - N/A - .so files in -devel subpackage. - N/A - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} - N/A - .la files are removed. - N/A - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file - N/A - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. - OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. - OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. - OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. - OK - No rpmlint output. - see above - final provides and requires are sane: - OK SHOULD Items: - Should build in mock. - didn't test - Should build on all supported archs - tested on i386 - Should function as described. - OK - Should have sane scriptlets. - N/A - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. - N/A - Should have dist tag - OK - Should package latest version - OK Other things noted - could use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. -- 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