[Bug 533899] Review Request: activemq-cpp - C++ implementation of JMS-like messaging client
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Dec 11 21:43:57 UTC 2009
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533899
Mattias Ellert <mattias.ellert at fysast.uu.se> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Mattias Ellert <mattias.ellert at fysast.uu.se> 2009-12-11 16:43:55 EDT ---
Fedora review - activemq-cpp - 2009-12-11
rpmlint:
$ rpmlint activemq-cpp/*.rpm
activemq-cpp-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
+ Package name follows naming guidelines
+ Specfile is named accordingly
+ The package's license "ASL 2.0" is a Fedora approved license
+ The package's license matches the license of the sources
+ The LICENSE.txt file is included as %doc
+ Specfile is written in legible English
+ Package builds in mock (Fedora 12)
+ Source matches upstream:
$ md5sum activemq-cpp-2.2.6-src.tar.gz src/activemq-cpp-2.2.6-src.tar.gz
1222f0d6c5f86ef3ed5a558a533c7564 activemq-cpp-2.2.6-src.tar.gz
1222f0d6c5f86ef3ed5a558a533c7564 src/activemq-cpp-2.2.6-src.tar.gz
+ Build dependencies are sufficient
+ Package calls ldconfig appropriately
+ No bundled system libraries
+ Package owns directories it creates
+ No duplicate files
+ File permissions are sane and %files have %defattr
+ %clean clears buildroot
+ Specfile uses macros consistently
+ %doc is not runtime essential
+ headers in devel package
+ no static libraries
+ devel depends on pkgconfig
+ devel depends on main with a fully qualified version
+ No libtool archive files
+ Package does not own others' files
+ %install clears buildroot
+ Installed filenames are UTF-8
Package approved.
--
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.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list