[Bug 205265] Review Request: libxml- Old libXML library for Gnome-1 application compatibility

[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: libxml- Old libXML library for Gnome-1 application compatibility


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=205265


kevin at tummy.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |kevin at tummy.com
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com  2006-09-09 23:14 EST -------
OK - Package name
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License (LGPL)
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
53846294aa850a7d042948176d1d19dc  libxml-1.8.17.tar.gz
53846294aa850a7d042948176d1d19dc  libxml-1.8.17.tar.gz.1
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
OK - .so files in -devel subpackage.
See below - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
OK - .la files are removed.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
See below - No rpmlint output.

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should include License or ask upstream to include it.
OK - Should build in mock.

Issues:

1. If the license is LGPL (as it appears to be), no need to include the
COPYING file as that is the GPL.

2. The devel package has:
Requires:       %{name} = %{epoch}:%{version}
That should probibly be:
Requires:       %{name} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}

3. rpmlint says:
E: libxml-devel only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
W: libxml-devel no-documentation

I think those can both be ignored in this case.


-- 
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.