Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: hdparm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225882 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-02-10 16:46 EST ------- MUST: - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (BSD) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all files/directories that it creates, does not take ownership of foreign files/dirs - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file - just a small binary, no static, .la, .pc etc - no scriptlets SHOULD - builds in mock - runs as advertised The only caveat I see is that, despite being passed RPM_BUILD_OPT in %build, it also takes looooots of compile parameters from the Makefile. All seem sane however, and are not very important since it's not an application from which to squeeze each ounce of performance. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
