[Bug 225758] Merge Review: flex

[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 report.

Summary: Merge Review: flex


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225758





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-05-26 01:28 EST -------
OK, this package is pretty much OK but I just want to run the static library by
FESCo so that these merge reviews get the same treatment that any other package
would get.  Some other comments:

Source: should be a URL, probably
  http://dl.sf.net/flex/flex-%{version}.tar.bz2

This package has a build-time dependency on "info" but I don't see why a
text-mode info browser would be useful for the build process.

I'll get back as soon as FESCo has a chance to discuss the static library issue.

* source files match upstream:
   53b56a62ea9409b99b7a0ac4a5204fac16ca7eaf39b9374164c346d6badc6914  
   flex-2.5.33.tar.bz2
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
? Not sure what BuildRequires: info is for.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
O rpmlint warnings are OK (static library OK pending FESCo ack).
* final provides and requires are sane:
   flex = 2.5.33-7.fc7
  =
   /bin/sh
   /sbin/install-info
   m4
* %check is present and all tests pass:
   Tests succeeded: 40
   Tests FAILED: 0
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* scriptlets are OK (install-info)
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* headers present, in base package because this package is only useful for 
  development.
* no pkgconfig files.
? static libraries present; FESCo ack pending.
* no libtool .la droppings.

-- 
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.