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: wiggle - help apply patches when 'patch' can't https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428725 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2008-01-15 13:07 EST ------- OK, that gets further but also fails to build due to a missing dependency on the "time" package. Adding that gets things going OK. I still didn't see the proper flags being passed to the compiler, but changing the make line to: make CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" %{?_smp_mflags} gets that done and fixes the empty debuginfo package as well. You might change "report" to "reports" in %description. There's a COPYING file in the tarball; you need to include that as %doc in your %files list. You should also include ANNOUNCE and TODO; there's no point in including INSTALL ad I'm not sure about DOC/diff.ps. So still a few things to fix before I can approve this package. Checklist: * source files match upstream: 639f8bd48c58b1fa4f24a65bc8aa3e53219e7d48726e63e7c40f0701d1d89b9c wiggle-0.6.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK (one minor typo; no big deal) * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. X license text is in the tarball but not included in the package. * latest version is being packaged. X BuildRequires are proper (still needs 'time' to build; assuming it's there so that I can complete this review) X compiler flags are not proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64) (after adding BR: time) * package installs properly X debuginfo package is incomplete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: wiggle = 0.6-2.fc9 = (nothing) * %check is present and all tests pass (after adding BR: time): 50 succeeded and 0 failed * 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. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. -- 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