https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1096807 Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(erik-fedora@vanpi | |enbroek.nl) | --- Comment #11 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- My deepest apologies for letting this review ticket remain open for such a long time.. Here's the final review: $ rpmlint mingw-SDL2_image.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw-SDL2_image-2.0.0-4.fc22.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw32-SDL2_image-2.0.0-4.fc22.noarch.rpm mingw64-SDL2_image-2.0.0-4.fc22.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpm --query --requires mingw32-SDL_image pkgconfig rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 mingw32-crt mingw32-filesystem >= 95 mingw32(kernel32.dll) mingw32(libjpeg-62.dll) mingw32(libpng16-16.dll) mingw32(libtiff-5.dll) mingw32(msvcrt.dll) mingw32-pkg-config mingw32(sdl.dll) rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --requires mingw64-SDL_image pkgconfig rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 mingw64-crt mingw64-filesystem >= 95 mingw64(kernel32.dll) mingw64(libjpeg-62.dll) mingw64(libpng16-16.dll) mingw64(libtiff-5.dll) mingw64(msvcrt.dll) mingw64-pkg-config mingw64(sdl.dll) rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 $ rpm --query --provides mingw32-SDL_image mingw32-SDL_image = 1.2.12-11.fc21 mingw32(sdl_image.dll) $ rpm --query --provides mingw64-SDL_image mingw64-SDL_image = 1.2.12-11.fc21 mingw64(sdl_image.dll) $ wget --quiet http://www.libSDL.org/projects/SDL_image/release/SDL2_image-2.0.0.tar.gz -O - | md5sum fb399c8386fb3248f1b33cfe81bdf92b - $ md5sum SDL2_image-2.0.0.tar.gz fb399c8386fb3248f1b33cfe81bdf92b SDL2_image-2.0.0.tar.gz + OK ! Needs to be looked into / Not applicable [!] Compliant with generic Fedora Packaging Guidelines [+] Source package name is prefixed with 'mingw-' [+] Spec file starts with %{?mingw_package_header} [+] BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] BuildRequires: mingw64-filesystem >= 95 is in the .spec file [+] Spec file contains %package sections for both mingw32 and mingw64 packages [+] Binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are noarch [+] Spec file contains %{?mingw_debug_package} after the %description section [+] Uses one of the macros %mingw_configure, %mingw_cmake, or %mingw_cmake_kde4 to configure the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to build the package [+] Uses the macro %mingw_make to install the package [/] If package contains translations, the %mingw_find_lang macro must be used [+] No binary package named mingw-$pkgname is generated [+] Libtool .la files are not bundled [+] .def files are not bundled [+] Man pages which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Info files which duplicate native package are not bundled [+] Provides of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal [+] Requires of the binary mingw32 and mingw64 packages are equal The BuildRequires for mingw32-gcc and mingw64-gcc is optional and can be removed, but this is a cosmetic thing. ====================================================== The package mingw-SDL2_image is APPROVED by epienbro ====================================================== -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review