[Bug 467410] Review Request: mingw32-libgcrypt - MinGW Windows gcrypt encryption library

[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=467410


Michel Alexandre Salim <michel.sylvan at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |michel.sylvan at gmail.com
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |michel.sylvan at gmail.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

Bug 467410 depends on bug 467403, which changed state.

Bug 467403 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-libgpg-error - MinGW Windows GnuPGP error library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467403

           What    |Old Value                   |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|                            |NEXTRELEASE



--- Comment #3 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michel.sylvan at gmail.com>  2009-02-03 19:40:56 EDT ---
Notes:
- Fedora version has been updated to 1.4.4, with substantial patches. Should
the
  mingw32 package be rebased first?
- Package description is a bit sparse. Should it be copied from Fedora's?

MUST

? rpmlint: source clean, binary has no-doc and script-without-shebang
  This is not in the guideline -- do all *.def need to have +x
  permissions?
+ package name
+ spec file name
+ package guideline-compliant
+ license complies with guidelines
+ license field accurate

- license file not deleted

+ spec in US English
+ spec legible
+ source matches upstream
+ builds under >= 1 archs, others excluded
+ build dependencies complete

N/A locales handled using %find_lang, no %{_datadir}/locale
?   library -> ldconfig

N/A relocatable: give reason

+  own all directories
+  no dupes in %files

?  permission -- see question above
+ %clean RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ macros used consistently
+ Package contains code

N/A large docs => -doc
N/A doc not runtime dependent
N/A static in -static
N/A if contains *.pc, req pkgconfig
N/A desktop file uses desktop-file-install

+ clean buildroot before install
+ filenames UTF-8

SHOULD
+ package functioned as described
+ scriplets are sane
+ if main pkg is development-wise, pkgconfig can go in main package
+ require package not files

Approved

-- 
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.