https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1419272
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST CC| |[email protected] Assignee|[email protected] |[email protected] Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <[email protected]> --- Not crazy about the super short name, but since it's what upstream uses, then OK. Group: Development/Libraries → unnecessary, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections. make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install → %make_install make %{?_smp_mflags} → %make_build Summary is useless. It should say if this is a library and give a hint what it does, especially that the name does not convey this. + package name is OK + license is acceptable (BSD) + license is specified correctly + R/BR/P look correct + -devel package requires matching main package + builds and installs fine in mock + fedora-review finds no issues + scriptlets are correct rpmlint: ck.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/libck.so.0.5.2 744 → This should 0755. Doesn't cause any issues afaics. Package is APPROVED. Please fix the file access mode and Summary, and consider the other changes suggested above. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
