I don't know what the policies of Fedora are on data that is generated by a
program, but sloccount produces the following statement at the bottom of each
report:

SLOCCount, Copyright (C) 2001-2004 David A. Wheeler
SLOCCount is Open Source Software/Free Software, licensed under the GNU GPL.
SLOCCount comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, and you are welcome to
redistribute it under certain conditions as specified by the GNU GPL license;
see the documentation for details.
Please credit this data as "generated using David A. Wheeler's 'SLOCCount'."

Does the "Please credit.." line cause a problem at all?  Is it required when
including the data in a report, etc?

Hi Bastien & Josh, I don't think the "Please credit..." line should be seen 
as anything more (or less!) than a polite request by the author.  The lines
immediately preceeding it clearly and unequivocally state that SLOCCount is 
GPL-ed.

Moving on to a quick (incomplete!) review, I noticed the following:

 - the source does not match upstream according to:

     wget http://www.dwheeler.com/sloccount/sloccount-2.26.tar.gz
     cmp sloccount-2.26.tar.gz.1 sloccount-2.26.tar.gz

   and this is a necessary pre-requisiste for almost any review

 - wrong "BuildRoot:" is used -- please see:
     http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines

" - the source does not match upstream according to:"
I'll blame Scott on that one, I used his source RPM as a starting point.

I'll fix up the rest of the .spec when I have a moment.

Hi Bastien, its been 2+ months since the last comment -- is this submission 
still active?

I really slacked on that. Just need to do some work on it...

Updated packages at:
http://files.hadess.net/redhat/perso/spec/sloccount.spec
and
http://files.hadess.net/redhat/perso/source/sloccount-2.26-1.src.rpm

Hi Bastien,

The above SRPM URL gave a 404 but I found the "-2" rev which I assume
you meant to reference in the first place.

36397816454626ed4abc11afc66783aaec01f444  sloccount-2.26-2.src.rpm

good:
 - source matches upstream
 - builds on FC4 i386 (still waiting on the mock build...)
 - rpmlint OK -- no warnings or errors
 - name OK
 - license is OK and correctly included
 - spec-file is clean and simple (although it might be 
     nice to use "%setup -q" but thats just a suggestion!)
 - no shared libs
 - dir ownership and permissions OK

very minor nit:
 - the description could be shortened a bit and the text 
     better formatted -- but thats not a blocker

Its taking me a while to get a mock build and I think its due to a 
slow network connection.  As soon as I get a clean mock build, I'll 
approve the package.

[note: the above was an sha1sum]

Builds in mock on FC4 i386.  Ran OK on some simple tests.

APPROVED.

Thanks for the advices Ed, it's all in CVS now.

Doesn't build with RPM optflags. A complete patch would be needed
(since CFLAGS are not accepted) or a hack like this:

--- sloccount.spec.orig 2006-04-04 11:21:23.000000000 +0200
+++ sloccount.spec      2006-04-04 18:54:27.000000000 +0200
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 %setup -q
 
 %build
-make
+make CC="gcc ${RPM_OPT_FLAGS}"
 
 %install
 rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}

That's actually what's recommended:
# Set this to your C compiler, if it's not "gcc"; a likely alternative is "cc".
# The "-Wall" option turns on warnings in gcc.  gcc users might also want
# to consider using "-Werror", which turns warnings into errors.
CC=gcc -Wall

Should be fixed in sloccount-2.26-4

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: sloccount
New Branches: el5 el6
Owners: hadess grover

Git done (by process-git-requests).