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: rsnapshot -- rsync-based filesystem snapshots

------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-05-19 00:28 EST -------
I got delayed a bit, but here you go:

The only questions I have relate to the %post script.  Are there any other
possible versions other than "unknown" and 1.2?  The comment indicates that the
"latest version is 1.2" which seems to allow for earlier versions.  If there
are, things seem to be busted.

* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible; license text is included in the package.
* source files match upstream:
   b27d90886b25d0e160b267f98c605aec  rsnapshot-1.2.3.tar.gz
   b27d90886b25d0e160b267f98c605aec  rsnapshot-1.2.3.tar.gz-srpm
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (FC5, x86_64).
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane.
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
O %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
? scriptlets are present.  They seem sane to me, but see questions above.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.

Configure bugmail:
------- 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

Reply via email to