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: audacious-plugin-fc - Future Composer plugin for Audacious https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=222648 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-06-28 22:11 EST ------- You shouldn't need a build dependency on pkgconfig; audacious-devel should have its own dependency (and indeed it does). But of course it doesn't hurt anything. It seems there's directory ownership problem; /usr/lib/audacious/Input is owned by audacious-plugins, but they're not required by this package. This seems like the kind of thing the base audacious package should own. Review: * source files match upstream: deafc2c95dc7a1a67a83b53b7871686fa280c8ed18547df51988b648dbe5519b audacious-plugin-fc-0.2.tar.bz2 * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: libfc.so()(64bit) audacious-plugin-fc = 0.2-1 = audacious >= 1.3 libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libaudacious.so.5()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libmcs.so.1()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpng12.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) * %check is not present; no upstream test suite. I've no ability to actually test this as I have no speakers on this machine. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. X Ownership issues with /usr/lib/audacious/Input. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. -- 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