Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: buildsys-macros
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225630
roozbeh@farsiweb.info changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|roozbeh@farsiweb.info |dgregor@redhat.com Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
------- Additional Comments From roozbeh@farsiweb.info 2007-02-06 08:33 EST ------- Minor remaining issues: MUST: US English * I am not a native speaker, but I think you need a "the" before 'dist' in the package description: "define the product version and *the* 'dist' tag".
MUST: rpmlint output W: buildsys-macros conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rpm/macros.disttag This is bad, I think. Using %config(noreplace) is recommended, although I don't see any real difference, as I don't think anybody may install this package on his normal box where it may be updated. It's not in the normal repos IIRC. W: buildsys-macros no-documentation It's fine.
The bureaucracy: MUST: named fine MUST: spec file named fine MUST: packaging guidelines met (except noreplace, mentioned above) MUST: license fine MUST: no license file needed as it's public domain MUST: spec file was made legible MUST: no source MUST: builds into noarch on FC6/i386 MUST: no excludearch MUST: no special build deps MUST: no locale MUST: not a lib MUST: not relocatable MUST: requires rpm that owns /etc/rpm MUST: permissions fine MUST: no dup files MUST: file permissions fine MUST: %clean section exists MUST: macro use fine MUST: package has code MUST: no large docs MUST: no %doc MUST: no header or static lib MUST: no *.pc MUST: no *.so.* MUST: no -devel MUST: no *.la MUST: not GUI MUST: doesn't own others' files
Package is approved.