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: qca-ossl - OpenSSL plugin for the Qt Cryptographic Architecture v2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=289701 ------- Additional Comments From lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx 2007-10-25 06:12 EST ------- Sorry for the delay. BTW why you still not build qca2? Formal review: - rpmlint not silent - then checking SRPM-package it shouts: [petro@host-12-109 SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/qca-ossl-0.1-2.20070706.fc7.src.rpm qca-ossl.src:35: E: configure-without-libdir-spec qca-ossl.src:56: W: macro-in-%changelog date The last warning should be easily omitted. But what about first one? Looks like qt4-buildsustem handles all such things by itself but can you prove that on x86_64 libqca-ossl.so placed in the right place? + 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: 908eaeed2c0f873bb7cf602814041559 /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/qca-ossl-0.1-20070706.tar.bz2 + package builds file (x86) + all build dependencies listed in BuildRequires + package doesn't need to call 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 Just FIY looking at the delta.affinix.com site I found that they released new versions for qca2 and qca-ossl. http://delta.affinix.com/download/qca/2.0/qca-2.0.0.tar.bz2 http://delta.affinix.com/download/qca/2.0/test4/qca-ossl-0.1-20070904.tar.bz2 Maybe you should update these two packages? -- 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