Spec URL: http://rezza.hofyland.cz/fedora/packages/libbluedevil/libbluedevil.spec SRPM URL: http://rezza.hofyland.cz/fedora/packages/libbluedevil/libbluedevil-1.7-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: libbluedevil is Qt-based library written to handle all Bluetooth functionality.
Uhm, %doc HACKING, really? Usually, HACKING is a document on how to develop the package itself, not useful for users of the package. Or is this one a (badly-named) document on how to develop WITH the library?
I wonder why it's included - one task on my big TODO list to be reported upstream.
[thomas@tusdell ~]$ rpmlint libbluedevil libbluedevil.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libbluedevil.so.1.5 /lib64/libpthread.so.0 libbluedevil.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libbluedevil.so.1.5 /lib64/libm.so.6 libbluedevil.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. ^^^^ installed libbluedevil OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License OK - License field in spec matches LGPLv2+ XX - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: md5sum 038bdc46b5b74e96fb178ec6ae9ed2d2 NN - Package needs ExcludeArch OK - BuildRequires correct NN - Spec handles locales/find_lang OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) OK - Package is code or permissible content. NN - Doc subpackage needed/used. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun OK - .so files in -devel subpackage. OK - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} NN - .la files are removed. NN - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. XX - No rpmlint output. See above and: libbluedevil.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) bluez -> blue, blues, bluer libbluedevil.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should function as described. Still under heavy development, patches flying around, upstream is very responsive and fast. Issues: The two warnings about spelling error and no documentation can be ignored. The above rpmlint output about unused-direct-shlib-dependency should be reported/asked upstream. None are blockers. APPROVED
Thanks Thomas! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: libbluedevil Short Description: A Qt wrapper for bluez Owners: jreznik than rdieter kkofler rnovacek thomasj Branches: f13, f14 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
libbluedevil-1.8-3.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libbluedevil-1.8-3.fc14
libbluedevil-1.8-3.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.