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=461106 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-20 17:19:49 EDT --- Sorry nobody's looked at this in a while, but I just tried to build on current rawhide (x86_64) and got: notification.cc: In static member function 'static void Notify::Notification_Class::class_init_function(void*, void*)': notification.cc:192: error: invalid conversion from 'void (*)(NotifyNotification*, gint)' to 'void (*)(NotifyNotification*)' notification.cc: In static member function 'static void Notify::Notification_Class::closed_callback(NotifyNotification*, gint)': notification.cc:238: error: too many arguments to function notification.cc: In member function 'virtual void Notify::Notification::on_closed(gint)': notification.cc:501: error: too many arguments to function It does build fine on F-10, though, and there's no requirement for a package to build on rawhide in order to be reviewed, although of course you'll want to get it building relatively soon. There are a pile of rpmlint unused-direct-shlib-dependency complaints, against things like libgtk-x11 and libatk. I don't think these are especially problematic as those libraries will be in memory anyway, but they're trivially fixed with the usual one-liner: sed -i -e 's! -shared ! -Wl,--as-needed\0!g' libtool after the %configure call. With that, rpmlint is silent. Note that the examples are GPL, not LGPL, but they aren't installed so there's no issue. Really I don't see anything which should block approval of this package. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: fea7f6f7e436d343a14ceed749b5e9ad78e34c0a62c7790520710de5236c402f libnotifymm-0.6.1.tar.bz2 * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (F-10, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. O rpmlint has some fixable complaints which aren't blockers. * final provides and requires are sane: libnotifymm-0.6.1-2.fc10.x86_64.rpm libnotifymm-1.0.so.7()(64bit) libnotifymm = 0.6.1-2.fc10 libnotifymm(x86-64) = 0.6.1-2.fc10 = /sbin/ldconfig libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglibmm-2.4.so.1()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libnotify.so.1()(64bit) libnotifymm-1.0.so.7()(64bit) libsigc-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) libnotifymm-devel-0.6.1-2.fc10.x86_64.rpm pkgconfig(libnotifymm-1.0) = 0.6.1 libnotifymm-devel = 0.6.1-2.fc10 libnotifymm-devel(x86-64) = 0.6.1-2.fc10 = gtkmm24-devel libnotify-devel libnotifymm = 0.6.1-2.fc10 libnotifymm-1.0.so.7()(64bit) pkgconfig * shared libraries installed: ldconfig called properly. unversioned .so link is in the -devel package. * 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. * scriptlets are OK (ldconfig). * code, not content. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * headers are in the -devel package. * pkgconfig are in the -devel package; pkgconfig dependency is present. * 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