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=468643 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-10-27 23:29:18 EDT --- I had hoped to get that done before leaving work, but.... rpmlint says: perl-Devel-GlobalDestruction-debuginfo.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long This package provides debug information for package perl-Devel-GlobalDestruction. which indeed is long, but not really under your control. Really, the only issue I see is the summary, which I trust you'll fix up to something comprehensible before you check in. * source files match upstream: 1c6665a98a7ee12d2e0ca926b800561f8ff4ea36daf487c02030a12f7a2b959c Devel-GlobalDestruction-0.02.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. X summary is seriously cryptic. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint has acceptable complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: GlobalDestruction.so()(64bit) perl(Devel::GlobalDestruction) = 0.02 perl-Devel-GlobalDestruction = 0.02-1.fc10 perl-Devel-GlobalDestruction(x86-64) = 0.02-1.fc10 = perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(Sub::Exporter) perl(strict) perl(vars) perl(warnings) * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=4, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.01 usr 0.01 sys + 0.01 cusr 0.00 csys = 0.03 CPU) * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. APPROVED The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package reviews recently, please consider doing one. -- 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