[Bug 625482] Review Request: libini_config - INI file parser for C

[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=625482

Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek at redhat.com> changed:

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

--- Comment #1 from Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek at redhat.com> 2010-08-27 06:39:46 EDT ---
RPMLint output:
libini_config.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libcollection ->
lib collection, lib-collection, collection
libini_config-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libini ->
libidinal, libido, Libia
libini_config-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) config -> con fig,
con-fig, configure
libini_config-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
libcollection -> lib collection, lib-collection, collection
libini_config-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libini ->
libidinal, libido, Libia
libini_config-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) config -> con
fig, con-fig, configure
libini_config-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libini
-> libidinal, libido, Libia
libini_config-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US config
-> con fig, con-fig, configure
libini_config.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libcollection -> lib
collection, lib-collection, collection

All the above are spurious warnings, there are no spelling errors in the
specfile.

The review passed and the package is APPROVED. 

The details follow:
 [OK] - The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
 [OK] - The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
 [OK] - The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
 [OK] - The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
 [OK] - The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
 [OK] - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
 [OK] - The spec file must be written in American English.
 [OK] - The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
 [OK] - The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
      - OK, 1ac3ddc283d6cf5f3b7206c66d228daa
 [OK] - The package MUST successfully compile and build
 [OK] - All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
      - The two above were tested with koji scratch build
 [OK] - Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
 [OK] - Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries
 [OK] - A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
 [OK] - A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
 [OK] - Each package must consistently use macros.
 [OK] - The package must contain code, or permissable content.
 [OK] - Header files must be in a -devel package. 
 [OK] - If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package.
 [OK] - In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency
 [OK] - Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
 [OK] - Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages 
 [OK] - All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. 
 [OK] - Permissions on files must be set properly

-- 
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.