review still needed: fpc

[Joost van der Sluis]

Thank you really very much for your review. 

On Thu, 2005-08-04 at 15:50 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> Review: fpc
> Good:
> 
> - meets naming, packaging guidelines
> - license (GPL/LGPL) ok, text in %doc, matches code
> - spec file in am. english
> - legible
> - sources match upstream
> - compiles/builds on FC4 (x86)
> - no locales
> - no missing BR, extra BR
> - no shared libs, no -devel
> - not relocatable
> - owns all dirs it creates
> - no duplicate %files
> - permissions ok
> - %clean ok
> - code, not content
> - -doc package used
> 
> Bad:
> 
> - typo in description for fpc-src, calls itself "fpc-doc"
> - Requires: gpm-devel ... is this really needed?

I've fixed the typo and the requirement (it wasn't needed) and committed
it to cvs.

If someone could find the time to look at the package and review it
(again) i would really appreciate that. 

If someone approves the package, I can request a build.

Regard,
  Joost van der Sluis.