[Bug 483553] Review Request: mingw32-libltdl - Runtime libraries for GNU Libtool Dynamic Module Loader

[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=483553


Richard W.M. Jones <rjones at redhat.com> changed:

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




--- Comment #7 from Richard W.M. Jones <rjones at redhat.com>  2009-02-02 11:16:49 EDT ---
General comments:

. You shouldn't need --host parameter to configure.

. It would be nice if the make check rule was surrounded by
  %if %{run_tests} ... %endif, and if it worked when run_tests
  was enabled.  (run_tests should be disabled by default though).
  See how we do it here:
 
http://hg.et.redhat.com/cgi-bin/hg-misc.cgi/fedora-mingw--devel/file/9ce8bc84c7bc/gmp/mingw32-gmp.spec#l7

+ rpmlint output

mingw32-libltdl.src:56: W: configure-without-libdir-spec

Weird one - we set --libdir in the mingw32_configure macro so I'm
not sure what rpmlint is talking about.  Ignore it.

+ package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines
+ specfile name matches the package base name
+ package should satisfy packaging guidelines
+ license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
+ license matches the actual package license
+ %doc includes license file
+ spec file written in American English
+ spec file is legible
+ upstream sources match sources in the srpm
+ package successfully builds on at least one architecture
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
+ %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
n/a package owns all directories it creates
+ no duplicate files in %files
+ %defattr line
+ %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
n/a static libraries should be in -static
n/a 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
n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
n/a packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
n/a %install must start with rm -rf %{buildroot} etc.
+ filenames must be valid UTF-8

Optional:

n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream
n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if
available
+ reviewer should build the package in mock
+ the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures
- review should test the package functions as described
n/a scriptlets should be sane
n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel
+ shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or
/usr/sbin

===> APPROVED
but it would be nice to see the two changes I point out at the top.

-- 
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.