[Bug 1035] Review request: amap - Network tool for application protocol detection

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1035 Jochen Schmitt <Jochen(a)herr-schmitt.de&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from Jochen Schmitt <Jochen(a)herr-schmitt.de&gt; 2010-01-07 21:14:30 --- Good: + Basename of SPEC file matches with package name + Package fullfill naming guidelines + Package has constantly rpm macro usage + URL shows on proper homepage of the project + Package contains mot recent release of the application + License tag exlaim GPLv2 with AMAP restrictions as a non-free license + Package doesn't contains subpackage + Package has proper defition of the BuildRoot + Buildroot will be cleaned as start of %clean and %install + Could download upstream tarball via spectool -g + Package tarball matches with upstram (md5sum: e3b1f5ebd24aac03aacb38ec183eb426) + mock build works fine + Rpmlint is ok for source package + Rpmlint is ok for binary package + Local install/uninstall works fine + Package need no separate doc subpackage because content of %doc stanza is small + All entries in %file list contains proper rpm macros + All files has proper prermissions + All files are owned by the package + No files are belong to another package Bad: - Build don't honour RPM_OPT_FLAGS - Rpm will create Req. to opensll and pcre automaticly - Package doesn't contains varbatin copy of the license text, but upstream package contains ones. - Rpmlint contains missing source in debuginfo package. This may be caused by a missing -g compiler flag -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.