[Bug 486475] Review Request: ps3-utils - Utilities for Sony PlayStation 3

[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=486475


Josh Boyer <jwboyer at gmail.com> changed:

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




--- Comment #1 from Josh Boyer <jwboyer at gmail.com>  2009-02-24 10:03:17 EDT ---
Review:

source files match upstream:
 [jwboyer at yoda SOURCES]$ sha256sum ps3-utils-2.3.tar.bz2 
c44a84da3cf37ecc69b36f6079a814e680cf37c74cb7d55f457635adb8209351 
ps3-utils-2.3.tar.bz2
 [jwboyer at yoda ~]$ wget
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/geoff/cell/ps3-utils/ps3-utils-2.3.tar.bz2
 [jwboyer at yoda ~]$ sha256sum ps3-utils-2.3.tar.bz2 
c44a84da3cf37ecc69b36f6079a814e680cf37c74cb7d55f457635adb8209351 
ps3-utils-2.3.tar.bz2


package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
dist tag is present.
build root is correct.
license field matches the actual license.
license is open source-compatible.
 GPLv2
license text included in package.
latest version is being packaged.
BuildRequires are proper.
compiler flags are appropriate.
%clean is present.
package builds in mock.
package installs properly.
debuginfo package looks complete.
rpmlint is silent.
  [jwboyer at yoda ~]$ rpmlint -i ps3-utils.spec 
  0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
  [jwboyer at yoda ~]$ rpmlint -i ps3-utils-2.3-1.fc10.src.rpm 
  1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

final provides and requires are sane
no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
owns the directories it creates.
doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
no duplicates in %files.
file permissions are appropriate.
no scriptlets present.
code, not content.
documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
%docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
no headers.
no pkgconfig files.
no libtool .la droppings.


I consider this 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.