Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

Summary: Tango standard library for D language of d1 specification

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608069

           Summary: Tango standard library for D language of d1
                    specification
           Product: Fedora
           Version: 13
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: NEW
          Severity: medium
          Priority: low
         Component: Package Review
        AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
        ReportedBy: bioinfornat...@gmail.com
         QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
                CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com
   Estimated Hours: 0.0
    Classification: Fedora


Spec url:
http://bioinfornatics.fedorapeople.org/tango.spec

Src.rpm url:
http://bioinfornatics.fedorapeople.org/tango-0.99.9-1.20102406svn5487.fc13.src.rpm


$ rpmlint -i SPECS/tango.spec 
SPECS/tango.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: tango-20102406svn5487.tar.xz
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
_____________________________________________________________________________
$ rpmlint -i SRPMS/tango-0.99.9-1.20102406svn5487.fc13.src.rpm => wrong
misspeling
warning and:
tango.src: W: invalid-url Source0: tango-20102406svn5487.tar.xz
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

upstream fix lot of bug

Note currently for D language they use static library, for shared library they
said "because D likes static, it is actually a bit complicated to have shared
libs"
from a discuss in IRC freenode #ldc

-- 
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.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

Reply via email to