[Bug 245743] Review Request: python-isprelink - Python module to determine if a file has been prelinked

[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: python-isprelink - Python module to determine if a file has been prelinked


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245743


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-06-29 00:37 EST -------
OK, just ping me when the source is publically available and we'll finish this off.

? source files match upstream
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   isprelink.so()(64bit)
   python-isprelink = 0.1.2-1.fc8
  =
   libelf.so.1()(64bit)
   libelf.so.1(ELFUTILS_1.0)(64bit)
   libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
   libpython2.5.so.1.0()(64bit)
   python(abi) = 2.5
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.