[Bug 659368] Review Request: luabind - A library that helps create bindings between C++ and Lua

[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=659368

Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich <krege at land.ru> changed:

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

--- Comment #4 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich <krege at land.ru> 2010-12-04 08:29:10 EST ---
Looks like author need to update the examples, the simplest one does not work.

luabind.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Lua -> Lu, La, Luna
luabind.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
luabind.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
luabind.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
luabind.src: W: no-%clean-section
luabind.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://download.sourceforge.net/luabind/luabind-0.9.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404:
Not Found
luabind.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Lua -> Lu, La, Luna
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.

In packaging guid writen download_s_.sourceforge.net, but it works as is. Does
not metter.

%{doc}/changes.txt,docs.html,index.html are in -devel subpackage. Any reasons
they must be there but not in the main package? It is not a blocker, ofcause.

=========
Review

* rpmlint output could be safty ignored.
* The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
* The spec file name matchs the base package %{name}. 
* The package meets the Packaging Guidelines .
* The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license: MIT.
* The License field in the package spec file matchs the actual license.
* File, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in
%doc.
* The spec file is written in American English.
* The spec file for the package is legible.
* The sources used to build the package match the upstream source.
* The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
* All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
* There are no locales.
* Binary RPM package calls ldconfig in %post and %postun.
* A package owns all directories that it creates.
* Files listed once.
* Permissions on files are setted properly.
* %doc does not affect the runtime of the application.
* Header files are in a -devel package.
* Library file that end in .so (without suffix) is in a -devel package.
* Devel packages requires the base package in proper way.
* Packages do NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
* All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
========

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.