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: e16 - The Enlightenment window manager, DR16 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=254056 ------- Additional Comments From kevin@xxxxxxxxx 2007-09-13 00:55 EST ------- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. See below - License See below - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 8d27553ae9c582a9d331ea4077063a14 e16-0.16.8.9.tar.gz 8d27553ae9c582a9d331ea4077063a14 e16-0.16.8.9.tar.gz.1 See below - BuildRequires correct OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang OK - 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. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - 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. See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. Some of the source files appear to be GPLv2+ epp/cpperror.c epp/cppalloc.c epp/cppexp.c epp/cpphash.c epp/cpplib.c epp/cpplib.h epp/cppmain.c >From a quick look, those source files all compile to the epp binary. The rest are BSDish, but not matching exactly any of the examples on the wiki. I am a bit concerned with the second paragraph: " The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies of the Software, its documentation and marketing & publicity materials, and acknowledgment shall be given in the documentation, materials and software packages that this Software was used." In addition there is a copy of the Bitsteam Vera Fonts with their own license inside the "winter.etheme" tar.gz thats in the e16 tar.gz. Can that be made somehow to use the already existing Vera package? I will have spot check it over... 2. Some possible missing BuildRequires: checking X11/SM/SMlib.h usability... no checking X11/SM/SMlib.h presence... no checking for X11/SM/SMlib.h... no checking for SmcOpenConnection in -lSM... no checking for XFT... no checking for XineramaQueryExtension in -lXinerama... no configure: WARNING: Xinerama support was requested but not found checking for XF86VidModeQueryExtension in -lXxf86vm... no configure: WARNING: Zoom support was requested but not found checking for XRRQueryExtension in -lXrandr... no configure: WARNING: RandR support was requested but not found checking for X11/extensions/Xrandr.h... no checking for XCompositeQueryExtension in -lXcomposite... no checking for X11/extensions/Xcomposite.h... no checking for X11/extensions/Xdamage.h... no checking for X11/extensions/Xfixes.h... no checking for X11/extensions/Xrender.h... no configure: WARNING: Composite support was requested but required component was not found checking for mass_quantities_of_bass_ale in -lFridge... no checking for mass_quantities_of_any_ale in -lFridge... no Warning: No ales were found in your refrigerator. We highly suggest that you rectify this situation immediately. 3. rpmlint says: e16.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/e16/themes/winter/slideouts/slideouts.cfg e16.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/e16/themes/winter/buttons/buttons.cfg Not sure if those can be removed, or if they are needed by that theme... e16.i386: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib/libe16_hack.so libe16_hack.so Does that so file need to be in /usr/lib? e16.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/e16-0.16.8.9/ChangeLog e16.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/e16-0.16.8.9/AUTHORS Might run 'iconv' on those? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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