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: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232465 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2008-01-21 17:46 EST ------- Builds OK; here's some rpmlint output: lv2core.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPL2.1+ Valid tags are at http://fedoraproject.org/Licensing; should be LGPLv2+. lv2core.x86_64: E: no-binary lv2core.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib lv2core-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package Comment #1 mentioned that this package should be noarch; is there some reason why it needs to be arch-specific? I can't find any reason why it would. lv2core-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation This is OK. I'm afraid I don't know what a .ttl file is, but just to be sure: can you confirm that the two ttl files are needed at runtime and not just during compilation? I'm trying to determine whether or not they need to live in the -devel package (which would sort of make the whole thing a -devel package, I guess). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review