[Bug 227111] Review Request: qdox-1.5-2jpp - Extract class/interface/method definitions from sources

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: qdox-1.5-2jpp - Extract class/interface/method definitions from sources


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227111





------- Additional Comments From pcheung at redhat.com  2007-02-16 22:51 EST -------
Added ant-nodeps as BR.
Built successfully in mock, rpmlint on mock built rpms:
[pcheung at to-fcjpp1 ~]$ rpmlint
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/*rpm
W: qdox non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
W: qdox invalid-license Apache Software License style
W: qdox non-standard-group Development/Libraries/Java
W: qdox invalid-license Apache Software License style
W: qdox-javadoc non-standard-group Development/Documentation
W: qdox-javadoc invalid-license Apache Software License style

[pcheung at to-fcjpp1 ~]$ rpm -qp --provides 
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/qdox-1.5-2jpp.1.fc7.noarch.rpm
qdox = 0:1.5-2jpp.1.fc7
[pcheung at to-fcjpp1 ~]$ rpm -qp --requires 
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/qdox-1.5-2jpp.1.fc7.noarch.rpm
java
jpackage-utils
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
[pcheung at to-fcjpp1 ~]$ rpm -qp --provides 
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/qdox-javadoc-1.5-2jpp.1.fc7.noarch.rpm
qdox-javadoc = 0:1.5-2jpp.1.fc7
[pcheung at to-fcjpp1 ~]$ rpm -qp --requires 
/var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64-core-pcheung/result/qdox-javadoc-1.5-2jpp.1.fc7.noarch.rpm
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1

spec file and srpm updated, available at the same location.

-- 
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.