[Bug 802161] Review Request: mingw-w64-tools - Supplementary tools which are part of the mingw-w64 toolchain

[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=802161

Kai Tietz <ktietz at redhat.com> changed:

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

--- Comment #4 from Kai Tietz <ktietz at redhat.com> 2012-03-16 12:50:07 EDT ---
Ok, so the review for the package

[ktietz at nike x86_64]$ rpmlint
mingw-w64-tools-debuginfo-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc15.x86_64.rpm 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[ktietz at nike x86_64]$ rpmlint
mingw-w64-tools-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc15.x86_64.rpm 
mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) toolchain -> tool
chain, tool-chain, Chaitin
mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain ->
tool chain, tool-chain, Chaitin
mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US widl -> wild,
wide, will
mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog
2.0.999-0.1.trunk.20120124 ['2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc15',
'2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124']
mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mingw-w64-widl
mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary genidl
mingw-w64-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gendef
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.

[ktietz at nike x86_64]$ rpmlint
mingw-w64-tools-debuginfo-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc15.x86_64.rpm 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

[ktietz at nike fd_mingw]$ rpmlint mingw-w64-tools.spec 
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[ktietz at nike fd_mingw]$ 

[ktietz at nike fd_mingw]$ rpmlint mingw-w64-tools
mingw-w64-tools-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc16.src.rpm
mingw-w64-tools.spec
[ktietz at nike fd_mingw]$ rpmlint
mingw-w64-tools-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc16.src.rpm 
mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) toolchain -> tool chain,
tool-chain, Chaitin
mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain -> tool
chain, tool-chain, Chaitin
mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gendef -> gender,
gen def, gen-def
mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US genidl -> genial
mingw-w64-tools.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US widl -> wild,
wide, will
mingw-w64-tools.src: W: file-size-mismatch mingw-w64-src_20120124.tar.bz2 =
104449518,
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/Toolchain%20sources/Automated%20Builds/mingw-w64-src_20120124.tar.bz2
= 33343
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.

So I don't see here anything wrong.  I checked for the difference in
size-mismatch the .md5 check for both packages and they are identical.  Might
be something caused by SF.

The warnings about missing man-pages can be ignored, as those tools don't
provide them.

The spelling errors are all bogus AFAICS.

So from my side of view this package is ok.

I agree that the rename of the tools can be done later.

-- 
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.