Spec Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/edje.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/edje-0.5.0.023-1.src.rpm Description: Edje is a complex graphical design & layout library. Its purpose is to be a sequel to "Ebits" which to date has serviced the needs of Enlightenment development for version 0.17. The original design parameters under which Ebits came about were a lot more restricted than the resulting use of them, thus Edje was born.
Why does bug 180056 (system-config-httpd references obsolete module names) block this?
Because I'm blind.
Updated. http://fedora.ivazquez.net/files/extras/edje-0.5.0.026-1.src.rpm
Good: - rpmlint is ok - name ok - spec name ok - packaging guidelines met - license ok - license matches actual license in package - license file in %doc - spec file in American English and legible - source matches upstream - builds, installs, runs, and uninstalls cleanly - BuildRequires ok - no locale to worry about - shared libs ok - -devel package ok - no relocation to worry about - no duplicated files - files perms ok - clean section ok - macro useage ok - package contains code - no large doc - %doc is only doc - builds in mock My machines here still run FC4, so I didn't check if the code actualy runs... but I'll trust you on this one. Why the empty %doc in the devel package ? I think %{_datadir}/%{name}/ is more explicit than %{_datadir}/%{name} but that's a matter of taste I guess... rpmlint says: E: edje non-executable-script /usr/share/edje/data/template/build_theme.sh 0644 E: edje non-executable-script /usr/share/edje/data/e_logo.sh 0644 W: edje-devel no-documentation which I think can be ignored. APPROVED.
Built on FC5 and devel.