[Bug 243974] Review Request: lx - Converts PBM data to Lexmark 1000 printer language

[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: lx - Converts PBM data to Lexmark 1000 printer language
Alias: lx-review

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243974


mmahut at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?, fedora-cvs- |fedora-review+, fedora-cvs?




------- Additional Comments From mmahut at redhat.com  2007-06-28 18:18 EST -------
+ source files match upstream:
	09168d453aa171784387b8e01f6ff293  /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/lx.c
+ package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
      %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
+ license field matches the actual license.
+ license is open source-compatible. 
+ latest version is being packaged.
+ compiler flags are appropriate.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installs properly
+ debuginfo package looks complete.
+ rpmlint is silent.
+ final provides and requires are sane:
  [root at storm lx]# rpm -qp --provides
/usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/lx-20030328-1.fc8.i386.rpm
  lx = 20030328-1.fc8
  [root at storm lx]# rpm -qp --requires
/usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i386/lx-20030328-1.fc8.i386.rpm
  libc.so.6  
  libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)  
  libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)  
  libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)  
  rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
  rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
  rtld(GNU_HASH)  
  [root at storm lx]# 
+ doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.


APPROVED

-- 
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.