[Bug 530047] Review Request: mingw32-tk - MinGW Windows graphical toolkit for the Tcl scripting language

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Wed Dec 22 19:12:42 UTC 2010

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
           Keywords|Reopened                    |
             Blocks|201449(FE-DEADREVIEW)       |
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> 2010-12-22 14:12:40 EST ---
Builds fine; just one rpmlint complaint:
  mingw32-tk.src:81: W: macro-in-comment %{name1}
which doesn't seem to be a problem to me.  There are no comments in a spec
file, so macros are still expanded and if they have multiple lines the behavior
isn't what you expect.

Everything else looks fine.

* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* version packaged is the same as the native Fedora version.
* package is noarch.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint has acceptable complaints.
* special mingw32 dependency generators are used.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   mingw32-tk = 8.5.9-1.fc15
   mingw32-filesystem >= 63

* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no static libraries.
* .dll and .def files in _mingw32_bindir
* .dll.a and .la files in _mingw32_libdir
* dll files are listed explicitly in %files.
* libraries and executables are stripped properly.


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 mingw mailing list