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=467388 --- Comment #5 from Tim Lauridsen <tim.laurid...@googlemail.com> 2009-01-16 04:10:27 EDT --- MUST: * package is named appropriately mingw32-* * it is legal for Fedora to distribute this * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * specfile name matches %{name} * summary and description fine * correct buildroot * %{?dist} is used * package meets FHS (http://www.pathname.com/fhs/) * changelog format fine * Packager, Vendor ,Distribution tag not used * License used and not Copyright * Summary tag does not end in a period * specfile is legible * package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86 * make sure lines are <= 80 characters * specfile written in American English * no -doc sub-package necessary * /sbin/ldconfig used in packages containing libraries. no native libs * Not GUI app * header files goes into -devel sub-package. no native header files * *.so goes into -devel sub-package. no *.so files * devel package require the base package using a fully versioned dependency no *-devel * *.la files is deleted. no *.la files * macros used appropriately and consistently * no %makeinstall * install section must begin with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{buildroot} * The spec file handles locales properly (%find_lang ) (no locales) * split Requires(pre,post) into two separate lines * package not relocatable * package contains code * package owns all directories and files * no %files duplicates . %defattrs present ( %defattr(-, root, root, -)) * %clean present * %doc files do not affect runtime no docs * follow the MinGW guidelines on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW SHOULD: * package should include license text in the package and mark it with %doc no license file for Public Domain * package should build on i386 -- 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@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
