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: rubygem-zoom - Ruby binding to ZOOM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=380081 s.adam@xxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From s.adam@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-11-17 13:06 EST ------- + source files match upstream: 117dd33cd73fa4fd7f32c52034142eb1394f9365 + package meets naming and versioning guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license field matches the actual license. + license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream. + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + compiler flags are appropriate. + %clean is present. + package builds in mock + package installs properly + debuginfo package looks complete. + rpmlint is silent. * The obsoletes warning OK, explained in specfile + final provides and requires are sane: $ rpm -q --provides --requires rubygem-zoom.x86_64 rubygem(zoom) = 0.3.0-1.fc8 zoom.so()(64bit) rubygem-zoom = 0.3.0-1.fc8 /usr/bin/ruby libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) libcrypt.so.1()(64bit) libcrypto.so.6()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libexslt.so.0()(64bit) libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit) libgpg-error.so.0()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libruby.so.1.8()(64bit) libssl.so.6()(64bit) libwrap.so.0()(64bit) libxml2.so.2()(64bit) libxslt.so.1()(64bit) libyaz.so.3()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1 rtld(GNU_HASH) ruby(abi) = 1.8 ruby(rubygems) + no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. + owns the directories it creates. + doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets present. + code, not content. + no headers. + no pkgconfig files. + no libtool .la droppings. + not a GUI app. ACCEPTED -- 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