Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freehdl : GPLed free VHDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=178709 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-01-26 01:40 EST ------- (In reply to comment #11) > Thanks all. > New version : > Spec Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl.spec > SRPM Name or Url: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eric.tanguy/freehdl-0.0.1-1.src.rpm > > rpmlint ../RPMS/i386/freehdl-0.0.1-1.i386.rpm > W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libfreehdl-cdfggen.so ... > W: freehdl devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/freehdl/fire.h > > I think it's not relevant with this package. What makes you think so? I disagree on this. If these files are host development files (very likely), then they should go to a *-devel package, if these files are target development files they are miss-places. I'd suggest you to implement a *-devel package. Besides this, there are further minor issues: * freehdl-config --cxxflags returns -I/usr/include * freehdl-config --ldflags returns -L/usr/lib * Some of the doc files aren't utf-8 nor asci encoded (German umlauts, probably iso8859-1 or iso8859-15 encoded). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
