Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 225279
Merge Review: aspell-no
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:54 EST
Fedora Merge Review: aspell-no
Can you update Source with new upstream tarball release?
SPEC name is aspell-no but source its using is aspell-nb
there is new tarball aspell-no-0.50.2.tar.bz2 available
With Maintainers reply
"Upstream changed tarball name from aspell-no to aspell-nb and then it remained
same for aspell-no package to use aspell-nb tarball with aspell-no SPEC name."
+ package builds in mock (development i386).
- rpmlint is NOT silent for SRPM and RPM.
But following messages are ignorable
E: aspell-no no-binary
E: aspell-no only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
E: aspell-no configure-without-libdir-spec
+ SPEC file contains explanation about above warnings.
+ source files match upstream.
+ package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
+ specfile is properly named, is cleanly written
+ Spec file is written in American English.
+ Spec file is legible.
+ dist tag is present.
+ build root is correct.
+ license is open source-compatible.
+ License text is included in package.
+ %doc is small; no -doc subpackage required.
+ %doc does not affect runtime.
+ BuildRequires are proper.
+ %clean is present.
+ package installed properly.
+ Macro use appears rather consistent.
+ Package contains code, not content.
+ no headers or static libraries.
+ no .pc file present.
+ no -devel subpackage exists.
+ no .la files.
+ no translations are available.
+ Dose owns the directories it creates.
+ no duplicates in %files.
+ file permissions are appropriate.
+ Requires: aspell >= 12:0.60
+ Provides: aspell-no = 50:0.50.1-11.fc7
+ Not a GUI APP.
As build is available now, therefore CLOSING this review.