Reviews still needed

[Christian.Iseli at licr.org]

tcallawa at redhat.com said:
> All of those issues are now resolved in CVS. Care to re-review (or approve)?
> :) 

- rpmlint is silent (wow :) ok
- name ok
- spec name ok
- packaging guidelines met ok
- license ok
- license matches actual license in package ok
- license file in %doc ok
- spec file in American English ok
- spec file quite legible :) ok
- source matches upstream md5 ok
- builds, installs, runs, and uninstalls cleanly (on my FC3 test beast) ok
- I think the BuildRequires can be simplified to:
BuildRequires:  kdelibs-devel, automake, autoconf, SDL-devel
BuildRequires:  mysql-devel, postgresql-devel, sqlite2-devel

the reason is that kdelibs-devel automaticaly brings in all the other listed 
-devel packages (along with a few others).

If not, I'd still like to hear optinions on wether to require XFree86-devel
or xorg-x11-devel...

- locale handling (none here) ok
- shared libs handling ok
- relocation (none) ok
- files stuff: ok except README is listed twice in %doc
- clean section ok
- macro useage ok
- package contains code ok
- large documentation split ok
- %doc is only doc ok
- header files in -devel ok
- .so in -devel not possible, so ok
- -devel (and other) packages require main package ok
- no .la files ok

I'll trust you to use your best judgement for the BuildRequires thing, and to 
remove the extraneous README in the %doc line.

Approved.

Cheers,
					Christian