Hide Forgot
Spec URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/fcode-utils.spec SRPM URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/fcode-utils-1.0.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Utilities for dealing with FCode, a Forth programming language dialect compliant with ANS Forth.
Note: original tarball contains also 'localvalues' directory, which contents liensed under Common Public License v. 1.0. I don't understand, what's the purpose of this content, and therefore didn't decide where should I install it, so I (temporarily, I hope) ignored it.
Ok, I added installation of 'localvalues': http://peter.fedorapeople.org/fcode-utils.spec http://peter.fedorapeople.org/fcode-utils-1.0.2-2.fc10.src.rpm Here is a koji scratchbuild: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1209116
Could you indicate, with a comment in the spec, which files are under which license? See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios That's the only issue I see; you can fix it up when you import the package. * source files match upstream. sha256sum: 7c135077a51bb843eb435f9d8c3447e9d632037d033c8836f7853cf2044873b4 fcode-utils-1.0.2.zip * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package (at least the GPL text is; the CPL text doesn't seem to be in the package). * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (none). * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: fcode-utils = 1.0.2-2.fc11 fcode-utils(x86-64) = 1.0.2-2.fc11 = (none) * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. APPROVED The package review process needs reviewers! If you haven't done any package reviews recently, please consider doing one.
Done! http://peter.fedorapeople.org/fcode-utils.spec http://peter.fedorapeople.org/fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc10.src.rpm New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: fcode-utils Short Description: Utilities for dealing with FCode Owners: peter Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: peter
cvs done.
fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc9
fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc10
fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update fcode-utils'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-2732
fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing-newkey update fcode-utils'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F9/FEDORA-2009-2762
fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
fcode-utils-1.0.2-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.