[Bug 614653] Review Request: libXcm - X Color Management 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=614653

Kalev Lember <kalev at smartlink.ee> changed:

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

--- Comment #7 from Kalev Lember <kalev at smartlink.ee> 2010-07-16 11:39:49 EDT ---
Fedora review libXcm-0.2.6-2.fc13.src.rpm 2010-07-16

+ OK
! needs attention

rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint libXcm \
          libXcm-devel \
          libXcm-0.2.6-2.fc13.src.rpm \
          libXcm-debuginfo-0.2.6-2.fc14.i686.rpm
libXcm.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colour -> color, co lour,
co-lour
libXcm.i686: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/libXcm.so.0.2.6
/usr/lib/libXfixes.so.3
libXcm.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colour -> color, co lour,
co-lour
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.

If you want to, you can change colour -> color (US spelling) before importing
the package, but otherwise the warnings are harmless and can be ignored.


+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ Spec file name matches the base package name
+ The package follows the Packaging Guidelines
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The license field in the spec file matches the actual license
+ The package contains license file (COPYING)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm. md5sum:
  96c1ee0c4f7f95dc448a0eb69b3929ae  libXcm-0.2.6.tar.gz
  96c1ee0c4f7f95dc448a0eb69b3929ae  Download/libXcm-0.2.6.tar.gz
+ The package builds in koji
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires look sane
n/a The spec file MUST handle locales properly
+ ldconfig is properly called in %post and %postun
+ Package does not bundle copies of system libraries
n/a Does not use Prefix: /usr
+ Package owns all directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ Permissions are properly set and %files has %defattr
+ Consistent use of macros
+ The package must contain code, or permissable content.
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc don't affect the package
+ Header files are in -devel
n/a Static libraries should be in -static
+ Library files that end in .so are in -devel package
+ -devel requires the fully versioned base
+ Package doesn't contain any libtool .la files
n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ Directory ownership sane
+ Filenames are valid UTF-8

> Requires:       xorg-x11-xtrans-devel
! Looks like you copy-pasted the wrong package name. Please change it to
Requires: xorg-x11-proto-devel as it's the *proto* package that contains
X11/Xatom.h, not *xtrans*.

I trust that you fix this before importing the package. Besides that, the
package looks good.

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.