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=492113
Mattias Ellert <mattias.ellert(a)fysast.uu.se> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |mattias.ellert(a)fysast.uu.se
Flag| |fedora-review?
Bug 492113 depends on bug 492110, which changed state.
Bug 492110 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-libsigc++20 - MinGW Windows port of the
typesafe signal framework for C++
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492110
What |Old Value |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED
--- Comment #1 from Mattias Ellert <mattias.ellert(a)fysast.uu.se> 2009-04-05
03:27:13 EDT ---
Fedora review mingw32-glibmm24-2.19.2-1.fc11.src.rpm 2008-04-05
* OK
! needs attention
* rpmlint output
Only expected Errors/Warnings from a mingw package
* Package is named according to Fedora mingw packaging guidelines
* Spec file is named as the package
* Package follows the Fedora mingw packaging guidelines
* The stated license (LGPLv2+) is a Fedora approved license
* The stated license is the same as the one for the corresponding
Fedora package
* The package contains the license file (COPYING)
* The spec file is written in legible English
* Sources matches upstream
9915c92a5a4b55fc2696bedf0d7af4cb glibmm-2.19.2.tar.bz2
9915c92a5a4b55fc2696bedf0d7af4cb SRPM/glibmm-2.19.2.tar.bz2
Accoding to guidelines the version should match the version of the
corresponding Fedora package - which it does. (It looks like there
is an update of the corresponding Fedora package to 2.20.0 in
preparation - the glibmm24 spec in CVS has been updated, so look
out for that.)
Fedora 10 has 2.18.1 (in case a Fedora 10 package is planned)
* Package builds in mock (Fedora 10)
* BuildRequires look sane
* Owns the directories it creates
* No duplicate files
* %files has %defattr
* %clean clears %buildroot
* Specfile uses macros consistently
* Package does not own other's directories
* %install clears %buildroot
* Installed filenames are valid UTF8
--
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.