[Bug 523224] Review Request: mingw32-xerces-c - MingGW Windows validating XML parser

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Nov 24 18:08:31 UTC 2009


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=523224


Kalev Lember <kalev at smartlink.ee> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |kalev at smartlink.ee
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |kalev at smartlink.ee
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




--- Comment #1 from Kalev Lember <kalev at smartlink.ee>  2009-11-24 13:08:29 EDT ---
Fedora review mingw32-xerces-c-3.0.1-1.fc12.src.rpm 2009-11-24

+ OK
! needs attention

rpmlint says:
mingw32-xerces-c.src: W: spelling-error-in-description en_US Namespaces
mingw32-xerces-c.noarch: W: spelling-error-in-description en_US Namespaces
mingw32-xerces-c-debuginfo.noarch: W: spelling-error-in-summary en_US mingw
mingw32-xerces-c-debuginfo.noarch: W: spelling-error-in-description en_US mingw
mingw32-xerces-c-debuginfo.noarch: E: debuginfo-without-sources
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.

All these rpmlint warnings are harmless and can be ignored. The
debuginfo-without-sources doesn't mean that anything is wrong with this
package, but rather that mingw32 debug package generator doesn't put sources in
the package.


+ 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
+ The stated license (ASL 2.0) is a Fedora approved license
+ The stated license is the same as the one for the corresponding
  native Fedora package
+ The package contains the license file (LICENSE)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm. sha1sum:
  71e4efee5397dd45d6bafad34bf3bc766bc2a085  xerces-c-3.0.1.tar.gz
  71e4efee5397dd45d6bafad34bf3bc766bc2a085  Download/xerces-c-3.0.1.tar.gz
+ Package builds in mock/koji
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires look sane
n/a The spec file MUST handle locales properly
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 Library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package
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

Looks good. 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.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list