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: libmowgli - An algorithm framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=374741 panemade@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From panemade@xxxxxxxxx 2007-11-19 01:14 EST ------- Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. with assuming you will import with correct changelog version. + source files match upstream url b8ba57aa4c674765b0852b44798227cb libmowgli-0.5.0.tgz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + BuildRequires are proper. + Compiler flags used correctly. + defattr usage is correct. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no static libraries. + libmowgli.pc file present. + -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + ldconfig scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Package libmowgli-0.5.0-0.3.fc9 -> Provides: libmowgli.so.1 Requires: libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.2) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) libdl.so.2 libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.0) libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.1) libmowgli.so.1 rtld(GNU_HASH) + Package libmowgli-devel-0.5.0-0.3.fc9 -> Requires: libmowgli = 0.5.0-0.3.fc9 libmowgli.so.1 pkgconfig + Not a GUI App. APPROVED. -- 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