fedora-review granted: [Bug 225630] Merge Review: buildsys-macros

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Feb 6 13:33:04 UTC 2007


Bug 225630: Merge Review: buildsys-macros
Product: Fedora Extras
Version: devel
Component: Package Review

Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh at farsiweb.info> has granted Roozbeh Pournader
<roozbeh at farsiweb.info>'s request for fedora-review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225630

------- Additional Comments from Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh at farsiweb.info>
Minor remaining issues:
MUST: US English
* I am not a native speaker, but I think you need a "the" before 'dist' in the
package description: "define the product version and *the* 'dist' tag".

MUST: rpmlint output
W: buildsys-macros conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rpm/macros.disttag
  This is bad, I think. Using %config(noreplace) is recommended, although I
  don't see any real difference, as I don't think anybody may install this
  package on his normal box where it may be updated. It's not in the normal
  repos IIRC.
W: buildsys-macros no-documentation
  It's fine.

The bureaucracy:
MUST: named fine
MUST: spec file named fine
MUST: packaging guidelines met (except noreplace, mentioned above)
MUST: license fine
MUST: no license file needed as it's public domain
MUST: spec file was made legible
MUST: no source
MUST: builds into noarch on FC6/i386
MUST: no excludearch
MUST: no special build deps
MUST: no locale
MUST: not a lib
MUST: not relocatable
MUST: requires rpm that owns /etc/rpm
MUST: permissions fine
MUST: no dup files
MUST: file permissions fine
MUST: %clean section exists
MUST: macro use fine
MUST: package has code
MUST: no large docs
MUST: no %doc
MUST: no header or static lib
MUST: no *.pc
MUST: no *.so.*
MUST: no -devel
MUST: no *.la
MUST: not GUI
MUST: doesn't own others' files

Package is approved.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list