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=459138 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-09-03 12:36:29 EDT --- OK, everything looks good. The only issue I see is that there seems to be some sort of test suite (in the src/tests directory of the tarball) and it would be good to run that if at all possible. * source files match upstream: d5d75cff03c58a7b9178099a8587caa348433f5702dc58e25e5b35dbef2b09f9 ctemplate-0.91.tar.gz * 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 (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: ctemplate-0.91-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm libctemplate.so.0()(64bit) libctemplate_nothreads.so.0()(64bit) ctemplate = 0.91-1.fc10 ctemplate(x86-64) = 0.91-1.fc10 = /sbin/ldconfig /usr/bin/perl libctemplate.so.0()(64bit) libctemplate_nothreads.so.0()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) ctemplate-devel-0.91-1.fc10.x86_64.rpm ctemplate-devel = 0.91-1.fc10 ctemplate-devel(x86-64) = 0.91-1.fc10 = ctemplate = 0.91-1.fc10 libctemplate.so.0()(64bit) libctemplate_nothreads.so.0()(64bit) ? %check is not present, but there seems to be a test suite. * shared libraries present: ldconfig called properly. unversioned .so links are 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. * scriptlets are OK (ldconfig). * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * headers are in the -devel package. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. -- 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
