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: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912 ------- Additional Comments From seg@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-04-29 17:25 EST ------- Alright, I'm working on a full review. rpmlint output: rpmlint jack-audio-connection-kit-0.101.1-4.fc5.i386.rpm W: jack-audio-connection-kit no-version-in-last-changelog Remember to tag your changelog entries with the package version number, like so: * Thu Apr 27 2006 Andy Shevchenko <andriy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 0.101.1-4 W: jack-audio-connection-kit one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig W: jack-audio-connection-kit one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig I don't know why mock is complaining. You've got exactly whats in ScriptletSnippets. Ignore it? rpmlint jack-audio-connection-kit-devel-0.101.1-4.fc5.i386.rpm W: jack-audio-connection-kit-devel no-version-in-last-changelog Ditto. rpmlint jack-audio-connection-kit-example-clients-0.101.1-4.fc5.i386.rpm W: jack-audio-connection-kit-example-clients no-version-in-last-changelog Ditto. W: jack-audio-connection-kit-example-clients no-documentation Ignorable. Also, I notice the man page for jackstart is getting installed even though the binary isn't. Looks like that's ultimately an upstream bug. And I see a %{__make} macro in there, as far as I know its useless, and its also inconsistent with the rest of the spec. Just use plain make. My preference would be to not use %{name} in source lines. And maybe not even in the subpackage Requires:. It should be unlikely that the package name would ever change. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review