[Bug 289681] Review Request: qca2 - Qt Cryptographic Architecture

[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: qca2 - Qt Cryptographic Architecture


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=289681





------- Additional Comments From lemenkov at gmail.com  2007-10-17 18:27 EST -------
Formal review follows.

MUST items:

- rpmlint not silent - is it necessary to place libqca.prl in /usr/lib?
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines
+ specfile is properly named
+ package meets Packaging/Guidelines
+ package licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing
Guidelines.
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file legible
+ sources match the upstream source 
7e90a314fc12beb1ba6bdbbfb007d0b4  /usr/src/redhat/SOURCES/qca-2.0.0-beta7.tar.bz2
+ package builds file (powerpc)
+ all build dependencies listed in BuildRequires
+ package calls ldconfig in %post and %postun
+ package owns all created directories
+ package not contains any duplicate files in the %files listing. 
+ permissions on files sets properly
+ package has a %clean section
+ package uses macros consistently 
+ package contains code or permissable content
+ header files are in a -devel package
+ package contains no static libs
+ package does not contain any .la libtool archives
+ not a GUI app
+ all filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8

Please resolve or explain issue with rpmlint - that's a last stop.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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.