Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459016 --- Comment #2 from Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-10-14 18:20:56 EDT --- 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 + Instead of just replacing -03 with -02 in the Makefile, you should try to use the value of RPM_OPT_FLAGS or %{optflags} as CFLAGS. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags In this case, you could use: make CFLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS + According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps you should use 'install -p'. + You could consider adding CHANGES to %doc as it gives an indication of the direction the project is taking. 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 xx - ExcludeArch is needed The upstream page (http://code.google.com/p/bunny-the-fuzzer/) says: "Bunny is currently known to support Linux, ... on IA32 and IA64 systems." One should note that IA64 is different from x86_64 or amd64. So it would be a good idea to cross-check whether IA64 has been mistakenly used to refer to x86_64 or amd64, and whether x86_64 or amd64 is supported or not. I think that x86_64 is supported since it seemed to work with gcc.x86_64. In case IA64 has been mistakenly used, we should ExcludeArch ia64, alongwith the other secondary architectures (ie., alpha, arm, s390, sparc) which might not be supported. 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 OK - %clean present OK - macros used consistently OK - contains code and permissable content OK - -doc is not needed OK - contents of %doc does not affect the runtime OK - no header files OK - no static libraries OK - no pkgconfig files OK - no library files OK - -devel is not needed 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 not needed OK - subpackages are not needed OK - no pkgconfig files OK - no file dependencies -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review