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: ohm - open hardware manager (as to be used on OLPC) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246748 ------- Additional Comments From mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-07-11 16:32 EST ------- rpmlint output: [mclasen@localhost Desktop]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/result/ohm-0.1.1-0.fc8.i386.rpm W: ohm service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/ohmd [mclasen@localhost Desktop]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386/result/ohm-devel-0.1.1-0.fc8.i386.rpm W: ohm-devel no-documentation both are ignorable, imo package name: ok spec file name: ok packaging guidelines: ok license: ok license file: ok license file included: ok spec file language: ok spec file readability: excellent upstream sources: ok buildable: ok BRs: ok locale handling: ok ldconfig: ok relocatable: n/a directory ownership: BAD, -devel must require pkgconfig for /usr/lib/pkgconfig file list dupes: ok defattr: ok %clean: ok macro use: ok permissible content: ok doc package: n/a %doc: ok headers: ok static libs: n/a .pc files: BAD, see above shared libs: ok -devel requires base: ok la files: ok desktop file: n/a directory ownership: ok %install: BAD, must do rm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install utf8 filenames: ok Two mustfix items, and one whishlist item, then you are good to go: - Must require pkgconfig in -devel - Must clean buildroot in %install - Should include AUTHORS and README in %doc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review