[Bug 166928] Review Request: numlockx
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Aug 28 17:46:08 UTC 2005
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: numlockx
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166928
tcallawa at redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com |tcallawa at redhat.com
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From tcallawa at redhat.com 2005-08-28 13:46 EST -------
Review:
Good:
- rpmlint check returns: W: numlockx strange-permission numlockx.sh 0775
safe to ignore
- meets naming and packaging guidelines
- license ok (MIT), matches source, text included as %doc
- spec is legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on x86 (FC4)
- no unnecessary, missing BuildRequires (./configure looks for xinitrc, but
never uses it for anything)
- no need for -devel, -docs
- no locales
- not relocatable
- creates no new directories
- no duplicate %files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use is consistent
- code, not content
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop
Nitpicks:
- %{_bindir} is cleaner than %{_usr}/bin/ ... please make that change.
- you might consider using %{version} in the Source0 line instead of hardcoding
the tarball version
Please change to %{_bindir} before committing, but this package is APPROVED.
I'll also go sponsor you right now.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list