[Bug 491617] Review Request: mingw32-libxml++ - MinGW Windows C++ wrapper for libxml2

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491617


Kalev Lember <kalev at smartlink.ee> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




--- Comment #7 from Kalev Lember <kalev at smartlink.ee>  2009-04-17 07:36:17 EDT ---
Fedora review mingw32-libxml++-2.26.0-1.fc11.src.rpm 2008-04-17

+ OK
! needs attention


+ rpmlint output
+ Package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ Specfile name matches the package base name
+ Package follows the Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ License meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
  LGPLv2+
+ License matches the actual package license
  It is also the same as in the corresponding Fedora libxml++ package
+ The package contains the license file (COPYING)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm
a52fc7e6e44bb5cc187672930b843f72  libxml++-2.26.0.tar.bz2
a52fc7e6e44bb5cc187672930b843f72  SRPM/libxml++-2.26.0.tar.bz2

+ Package builds in mock (Fedora Rawhide i586)
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun
+ Does not use Prefix: /usr
+ Package owns all directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ %files has %defattr
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Consistent use of macros
+ Package must contain code or permissible content
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a Header files should be in -devel
    Fedora MinGW guidelines allow headers in main package
n/a Static libraries should be in -static
+ Packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a Packages should not contain libtool .la files
    Fedora MinGW guidelines allow .la files
n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ Packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Filenames must be valid UTF-8

After the %install cleanup dos2unix is no longer needed in BuildRequires, but
that can be fixed without having to send an updated version for me to approve.


Package APPROVED.

-- 
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.