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: qca2 - Qt Cryptographic Architecture https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=289681 ------- Additional Comments From lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx 2007-10-17 18:27 EST ------- Formal review follows. MUST items: - rpmlint not silent - is it necessary to place libqca.prl in /usr/lib? + package meets naming and packaging guidelines + specfile is properly named + package meets Packaging/Guidelines + package licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + spec file written in American English + spec file legible + sources match the upstream source 7e90a314fc12beb1ba6bdbbfb007d0b4 /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/qca-2.0.0-beta7.tar.bz2 + package builds file (powerpc) + all build dependencies listed in BuildRequires + package calls ldconfig in %post and %postun + package owns all created directories + package not contains any duplicate files in the %files listing. + permissions on files sets properly + package has a %clean section + package uses macros consistently + package contains code or permissable content + header files are in a -devel package + package contains no static libs + package does not contain any .la libtool archives + not a GUI app + all filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8 Please resolve or explain issue with rpmlint - that's a last stop. -- 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