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: fantasdic - Dictionary application using Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=429443 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2008-01-21 17:33 EST ------- Builds fine and seems to work well enough. I don't understand why you have BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = %{rubyabi} I don't suppose it hurts anything, except to prevent this from building if the ABI happens to change. I thought it odd that --without-scrollkeeper is passed to setup.rb, but it looks like the files make it to the right place. Actually for an application this simple the spec is amazingly complex, but it all seems to work so I don't see any real problems with it. * source files match upstream: 7c05264b53f24e8738977f27ef7015cda952505461ad7b45a1f7fddeaa7835c2 fantasdic-1.0-beta5.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. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. ? BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: fantasdic = 1.0-0.1.beta5.fc9 = /bin/sh /usr/bin/ruby ruby ruby(abi) = 1.8 ruby(gconf2) ruby(gettext-package) ruby(gnome2) ruby(gtk2) ruby(libglade2) scrollkeeper * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I installed this package and it seems to work well enough. * 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. * scriptlets are OK (scrollkeper, icon cache) * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * desktop file looks correct and is installed properly. * Localization files are installed properly. 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