[Bug 227075] Review Request: jtidy-1.0-0.20000804r7dev.6jpp - HTML syntax checker and pretty printer
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Tue Feb 13 16:04:04 UTC 2007
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: jtidy-1.0-0.20000804r7dev.6jpp - HTML syntax checker and pretty printer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227075
------- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat.com 2007-02-13 11:03 EST -------
(In reply to comment #9)
> The spec that is attached still has the double Requires/missing BR problem.
Verified.
One problem I see is that I don't think its release is proper. I'm under the
impression that it should be of the form:
0.Z.tag.Xjpp.Y%{?dist}
I don't see a Z in this case.
> E: jtidy tag-not-utf8 %changelog
> E: jtidy non-utf8-spec-file jtidy.spec
Verified.
> X BuildRoot incorrect. Should be:
>
> %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
I think this should be fixed regardless of the current discussion. The
*current* review guidelines specify the buildroot so please use it.
> X remove "section free"
Verified.
> X package successfully compiles and builds on at least x86
I still get lots of:
7. ERROR in
/home/andrew/rpmbuild/BUILD/jtidy-04aug2000r7-dev/src/org/w3c/tidy/DOMAttrImpl.java
(at line 31)
public class DOMAttrImpl extends DOMNodeImpl implements org.w3c.dom.Attr {
^^^^^^^^^^^
The type DOMAttrImpl must implement the inherited abstract method
Attr.getSchemaTypeInfo()
This needs to be fixed.
> X BuildRequires are proper
> . one of the duplicate "Requires: xml-commons-apis" should become a BuildRequires
Verified.
> X package builds on i386
> . see above
> X package functions
> . I don't know how to test this package
These are still present (obviously :).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the package-review
mailing list