[Bug 199402] Review Request: chrpath - Modify rpath of compiled programs
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Jul 19 12:35:06 UTC 2006
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: chrpath - Modify rpath of compiled programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199402
------- Additional Comments From mr.ecik at gmail.com 2006-07-19 08:26 EST -------
I haven't been sponsored yet, so this is not official review.
MUST items:
* rpmlint doesn't show anything.
* package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
* spec file is named correctly.
* package is licensed with an open-source GPL license.
* the License field in spec matches the actual license.
* license file is included in %doc.
* spec file is legible.
* package succesfully compiles on i386.
* there is no need to any build dependencies - package successfully
compile on
mock.
* there is no locales.
* there is no shared library files.
* there is no duplicate files in %files section.
* %files section includes %defattr line.
* package has %clean section.
* macros are used properly.
* there is no need to -doc subpackage.
* files in %doc don't affect the runtime of the application.
* there is no GUI applications.
COMMENTS:
* I cannot check if sources match md5sum because I cannot connect to
ftp.hungry.com server.
* BuildRoot should be: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-
root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
* why do you use 'make' instead of 'make %{?_smp_mflags}'? According to
Parallel
make chapter of Packaging Guidelines you should use the second option.
--
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.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list