On Sun, 29 Sep 2013 11:59:43 -0400, Lars Kellogg-Stedman wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I've just submitted my first package review request to Fedora > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1013363), which is for > "libre" (http://www.creytiv.com/re.html). This is a dependency for > "baresip" (http://www.creytiv.com/baresip.html), which is a barebones > SIP client that I've found very useful for testing SIP connectivity. > I would ultimately like to get baresip into Fedora, but I will first > need to get the libre and librem libraries packaged first. > > I've done a lot of packaging in the past for personal and/or work > related projects, but this is my first time trying to share work with > the larger community. Doesn't look too bad ;) judging based on very brief look at the spec file, but it violates the Static Library Packaging Guidelines, and I wonder who "owns" %{_datadir}/re? * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories > %{_libdir}/libre.so A version-less library is less than ideal, however. How stable is the API/ABI? -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
