[Bug 217256] Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Mon Nov 27 04:51:33 UTC 2006


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: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217256


panemade at gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163778                      |163779
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From panemade at gmail.com  2006-11-26 23:51 EST -------
Anyway you can also do that while importing/updating this package in CVS.
Review:
+ package builds in mock (development i386).
+ rpmlint is silent for SRPM and RPMS.
+ source file's md5sum is
7342056614623273abccb1cd38a674d8  alsa-tools-1.0.12-pruned.tar.bz2
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.  License text included in package.
+ %doc is small; no -doc subpackage required.
+ %doc does not affect runtime.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage exists
+ firmware subpackage though written in spec file its disabled.
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available
+ Does owns the directories it creates.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ Desktop files installed without desktop-files-install as its really not needed.
APPROVED.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list