[Bug 783778] Review Request: libgta - Library that implements the Generic Tagged Arrays file format

[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=783778

Joonas Sarajärvi <muep at iki.fi> changed:

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

--- Comment #2 from Joonas Sarajärvi <muep at iki.fi> 2012-02-05 19:04:50 EST ---
Review for libgta-1.0.2-1

Rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint SPECS/libgta.spec SRPMS/libgta-1.0.2-1.fc16.src.rpm
RPMS/x86_64/libgta-*.rpm
libgta.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US 4 packages and 1 specfiles
checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

| MUST Item                               | Comments |
|-----------------------------------------+----------|
| Package name                            | OK       |
| Spec file name                          | OK       |
| Packaging guidelines                    | OK       |
| Licensing                               | OK       |
| License match                           | OK       |
| License file in %doc                    | OK       |
| Spec file English                       | OK       |
| Spec file legibilty                     | OK       |
| Source archive md5                      | OK [1]   |
| Builds on primary archs                 | OK [2]   |
| Build dependencies                      | OK [3]   |
| Locales                                 | OK       |
| ldconfig calls in %post, %postun        | OK       |
| No copies of system libraries           | OK       |
| Relocatability                          | OK       |
| Owns all created dirs                   | OK       |
| %files item unqueness                   | OK       |
| File permissions                        | OK       |
| Macro use consitence                    | OK       |
| Code or permissible content             | OK       |
| Large docs in -doc subpackage           | OK [4]   |
| %doc contents do not affect use         | OK       |
| Header files in -devel subpkg           | OK       |
| Static libs in -static subpkg           | OK       |
| .so symlink in -devel subpkg            | OK       |
| -devel requires base package            | OK       |
| No libtool archives                     | OK       |
| .desktop file if needed                 | OK       |
| other packages' files or dirs not owned | OK       |
| All filesnames are UTF-8                | OK       |
|-----------------------------------------+----------|
| SHOULD item                             | Comments |
|-----------------------------------------+----------|
| License text request                    | OK       |
| Translations of description and summary | none     |
| Package builds in mock                  | OK       |
| Builds on all primary archs             | OK       |
| Package functions as described          | OK [5]   |
| Scriptlets are sane                     | OK       |
| Subpackage deps on base package         | OK       |
| pkgconfig file placement                | OK       |
| prefer package deps over file deps      | OK       |
| man pages for binaries/scriprs          | OK       |

Notes:
[1] Md5 sum: 921566669683385f295bb6f21d5dedee.
[2] Builds both on x86_64 and i386.
[3] Builds in mock.

[4] Reference documentation takes 1.7 megabytes. I do not feel
    it is big enough to block the review, but would myself
    prefer having them and the examples in a -doc subpkg.

[5] All the shipped example programs can be built. Did not test
    if the library actually works as described.

-- 
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.