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: powerpc-utils - Utilities for PowerPC platforms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=396731 jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx 2007-11-27 16:44 EST ------- - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines - Spec file matches base package name. - Spec has consistant macro usage. - Meets Packaging Guidelines. - License - License field in spec matches - License file included in package - Spec in American English - Spec is legible. - Sources match upstream md5sum: 33de4697b9dc36be070ae67d545fd4fe - BuildRequires correct - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. - Package has a correct %clean section. - Package has correct buildroot %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) - Package is code or permissible content. - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. - Package has no duplicate files in %files. - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. - Package owns all the directories it creates. - No rpmlint output. SHOULD Items: - Should build in mock. - Should build on all supported archs - Should function as described. - Should have sane scriptlets. - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. - Should have dist tag - Should package latest version 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