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=510843 Jason Tibbitts <ti...@math.uh.edu> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org |ti...@math.uh.edu Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts <ti...@math.uh.edu> 2009-07-11 11:28:39 EDT --- Builds fine and rpmlint is silent. The compiler is not called with the proper set of flags. You will need to find some way to pass %{optflags} to the makefile. Sometimes setting CFLAGS does it, but sometimes you have to patch the Makefile. At least -g is passed to the compiler so the debuginfo package isn't broken. I would suggest packaging the manpage as a manpage instead of leaving it with the rest of the documentation. Please consider using install -p to preserve the timestanps on the scripts you install. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: 54949e99009f8f4484609b136e46439ebaa54bc9760a35f10c714e169a36f9e3 samtools-0.1.5c.tar.bz2 * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. X compiler flags are not correct. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: samtools = 0.1.5c-1.fc12 samtools(x86-64) = 0.1.5c-1.fc12 = /usr/bin/perl libncurses.so.5()(64bit) libtinfo.so.5()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) perl(Data::Dumper) perl(Getopt::Std) perl(strict) perl(warnings) * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. I've no idea how to test this. * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package reviews recently, please consider doing one. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
