[Bug 201941] Review Request: tetex-elsevier

[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: tetex-elsevier


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201941


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163778                      |163779
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-08-10 22:15 EST -------
There's not much to this package; upstream doesn't distribute this as anything
other than a bunch of separate files.  However, one things that concerns me is
the files are essentially unversioned upstream.  One thing you might consider
doing is preserving the original file dates, but that might be difficult when
fixing up the line endings.

Also, why do you have BuildRequires: tetex-latex?  It doesn't seem to be
required for anything since you're just copying files around.

Otherwise rpmlint is quiet and everything looks good.

* source files match upstream:
   bb7c3602a593e7801068a0f4e3ac794e  elsart1p.cls
   2708bc993954490cb837de6a50548adc  elsart3p.cls
   06e26323c76bcfac2186918a050e84a2  elsart5p.cls
   42609cbfaf1af3a660af564dbab9d42c  elsart.cls
   9205bf5292356dd1f0c924de61bc8dda  elsart-harv.bst
   d94d325492f5efdb522bc1b966338ffd  elsart-num.bst
   0c563cda4d6a90aed64b1842cd1a3cc1  instructions-harv.pdf
   d705c36eed9d254a25749bbf76e32a8f  instructions-num.pdf
   cc0c1c70f26472955aeb9e278e230858  template-harv.tex
   aa0283ae870ebb69c2dee52eb3881b58  template-num.tex
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.  License text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
? BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   tetex-elsevier = 0.1.20060416-3.fc6
  =
   /usr/bin/texhash
   tetex-latex
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* scriptlets look OK.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.  (Actually the
documentation is several times larger than the rest of the package, but the
whole thing is only 500K.)
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.