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: sublib - a subtitle library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=439453 ------- Additional Comments From akahl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-05-18 13:55 EST ------- Looks much better now :) Package Review ============== * rpmlint output: sublib.x86_64: E: no-binary OK, rpmlint cannot handle mono properly yet sublib.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib Same sublib-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package OK according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Mono#head-a86970c53975635088edc78a0e579b524531d571 sublib-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation OK, no documentation provided for development -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines * The spec file name matches the base package * Fedora approved license: GPLv2+ * License field in the package spec file matches the actual license * COPYING included * The spec file is written in American English * The spec file is legible * The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source: SHA1 4c7194666e9991efc7793ab300f60f95c7b56d85 sublib-0.9.zip * Builds locally on dist-f9 x86_64 * BuildRequires look sane * No locales * No libraries in dynamic linker's default paths * No relocatable libraries * Package owns all directories it creates * No duplicates in %files * File permissions are sane * %clean starts with build root clean -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Consistent use of macros Please replace: - sed with %{__sed} -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * The package contains code * Documentation not large, no -doc subpackage needed * No header files * No static libs * pkgconfig files handled properly * No suffixed library files * -devel package requires base package * No libtool archives * No desktop file * Package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages * %install starts with build root clean * All filenames are valid UTF-8 Additional Checks ================= * Latest version is being packaged: 0.9 * Dist tag is present * Group tag is valid * Build root is correct: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) * Scriptlets look sane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Package does not build in mock for ppc64: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=616191 mono-devel is not available for ppc64. - Please add an ExcludeArch: ppc64 - After this package has been approved, please open a new report (with component gnome-subtitles) which tells that gnome-subtitles does not support ppc64 and make the bug block FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * No GConf schema files * No scrollkeeper documentation * Requires is complete, all dependencies resolved automatically Mono-specific Checks ==================== * Assembly location is correct: %{_libdir}/%{name} * No global assemblies are registered with gacutil * Package builds without source version of mono * pkgconfig file in -devel * No prebuilt assemblies distributed * Library too immature for registration with the GAC * Not distributing .DLLs from other projects * _libdir not redefined * Package not noarch After resolving the two remaining issues, I'll approve the package. -- 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