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: ocaml-gettext - OCaml library for i18n https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442867 ------- Additional Comments From kevin@xxxxxxxxx 2008-04-25 19:53 EST ------- See below - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (LGPLv2+ with exceptions) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 4e95d69e6910c4c0dcafb7e2f8dc5491 ocaml-gettext-0.2.0.tar.gz 4e95d69e6910c4c0dcafb7e2f8dc5491 ocaml-gettext-0.2.0.tar.gz.orig OK - Package needs ExcludeArch See below - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. OK - .so files in -devel subpackage. OK - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. See below - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. Whats with the odd release naming? If you need a snapshot release, see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-cfd71146dbb6f00cec9fe3623ea619f843394837 and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#head-615f6271efb394ab340a93a6cf030f2d08cf0d49 2. I see in the build output: checking for fop... no configure: WARNING: Cannot find fop." Missing buildrequires? 3. Looks like the camomile-devel and devel subpackages duplicate all the docs... That doesn't seem very ideal. %doc README CHANGELOG TODO build/share/doc/html/* on both of them. 4. rpmlint says: ocaml-gettext-camomile.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib This can be ignored as you can't make just a subpackage noarch. -- 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