Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: libsoup (not started) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226046 ------- Additional Comments From debarshi.ray@xxxxxxxxx 2008-06-15 01:24 EST ------- MUST Items: OK - rpmlint is clean OK - follows Naming Guidelines OK - spec file is named as %{name}.spec xx - package does not meet Packaging Guidelines + BuildRoot MUST contain at least %{name}, %{version} and %{release}. Recommended values can be found at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag in decreasing order of preference. + According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Parallel_make you should use 'make %{?_smp_mflags}' whenever possible. In this case since upstream supports parallel builds you should use it. + According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used %makeinstall macro should not be used. To also preserve timestamps you could consider using: make install INSTALL="%{__install} -p" DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT (Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=662427) + Looks like http://live.gnome.org/LibSoup would be a better choice for the URL. + Why is disable-gtk-doc used? The Fedora 8 package does not use it. Maybe you could put a comment explaining it. + Why not include the ChangeLog in %doc? OK - license meets Licensing Guidelines OK - License field meets actual license OK - upstream license file included in %doc OK - spec file uses American English OK - spec file is legible OK - sources match upstream sources OK - package builds successfully OK - ExcludeArch not needed OK - build dependencies correctly listed OK - no locales OK - no shared libraries OK - package is not relocatable OK - file and directory ownership OK - no duplicates in %file OK - file permissions set properly + The preferred attribute definition is: %defattr(-,root,root,-) OK - %clean present OK - macros used consistently + While %{name} is used at other places, libsoup is used in the %setup and %files stanzas. You could consider using %{name} in those places too. OK - contains code and permissable content OK - -doc is not needed OK - contents of %doc does not affect the runtime OK - header files in -devel OK - no static libraries OK - -devel has *.pc file and requires pkgconfig OK - library files without suffix in -devel OK - -devel requires base package OK - no libtool archives OK - %{name}.desktop file not needed OK - does not own files or directories owned by other packages OK - buildroot correctly prepped OK - all file names valid UTF-8 SHOULD Items: OK - upstream provides license text xx - no translations for description and summary OK - package builds in mock successfully OK - package builds on all supported architectures OK - package functions as expected OK - scriptlets are sane OK - subpackages other than -devel are not needed OK - pkgconfig files in -devel OK - no file dependencies -- 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