[Bug 169722] Review Request: libsexy: Some graphical widgets for GTK+ 2

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: libsexy: Some graphical widgets for GTK+ 2


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169722


chris at chrisgrau.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com              |chris at chrisgrau.com
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From chris at chrisgrau.com  2005-10-12 22:03 EST -------
$ rpmlint libsexy-0.1.1-1.i386.rpm
E: libsexy library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib/libsexy.so.0.0.0
E: libsexy library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib/libsexy.so.0.0.0

Based on the PackageReviewGuidelines, I assume this really is an error. 
However, without any changes to the spec, I was able to build and run a small
demo app using the SexyUrlLabel.  Still, it's a MUST, so I'm pointing it out.

Good:

- package name good, spec file name good
- license is LGPL, matches upstream
  - based on the new package guidelines, you can (should?) remove the extra
COPYING.LIB
- spec file is legible, written in am. english
- source matches upstream
- builds cleanly in mock (FC-3 i386)
- built and tested successfully (FC-4 i386)
- files and directories okay
- -devel subpackage good

Nitpicks:

I think the summary and description are too vague and boring for a package with
the name "libsexy."


-- 
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.