[Bug 240652] Review Request: ocaml-pcre - Perl compatibility regular expressions (PCRE) for OCaml
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Jul 27 03:34:09 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: ocaml-pcre - Perl compatibility regular expressions (PCRE) for OCaml
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240652
lxtnow at gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
------- Additional Comments From lxtnow at gmail.com 2007-07-26 23:34 EST -------
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[ OK ] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ OK ] Spec file name must match the base package.
[ OK ] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[ OK ] Package successfully builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
[ CHECK ] Tested on: Mock x86_64 [FC-devel]
[ OK ] Package is not relocatable.
[ OK ] Buildroot is correct
[ OK ] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license.
[ OK ] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[ OK ] License type: LGPL
[ OK ] The source package includes the text of the license(s).
[ OK ] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ SKIP ] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[ OK ] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
[ OK ] The spec file handles locales properly.
[ SKIP ] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[ Ok ] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[ OK ] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[ OK ] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[ OK ] Permissions on files are set properly.
[ OK ] Package has a %clean section.
[ OK ] Package consistently uses macros.
[ OK ] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[ SKIP ] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[ CHECK ] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ SKIP] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[ SKIP ] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[ SKIP ] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[ SKIP ] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[ CHECK ] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[ OK ] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[ SKIP ] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file.
[ OK ] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
According to OCaml Packaging Guideline:
[ OK ] OCaml modules / libs should be named ocaml-foo.
[ OK ] The spec file should still build bytecode libraries and binaries.
[ OK ] Should Test if the native compiler is present.
[ OK ] main package should contain files matching all files which're mentioned
in OCaml guideline if present.
[ OK ] -devel sub-package Should contains all files which're mentioned in OCaml
guidelines if present.
[ ? ] Rpmlint output:
* Silent on SRPM and -devel packages.
* From RPM (main package):
W: ocaml-pcre devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ocaml/pcre/pcre.cmi
W: ocaml-pcre unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllpcre_stubs.so
This above can be ignored accroding to the OCaml packaging guideline
==========
*APPROVED*
==========
--
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