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: lat (LDAP Administration Tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177580 ------- Additional Comments From paul@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-12 08:16 EST ------- (In reply to comment #14) > MUST fix: > ========= > * %post and %postun call update-desktop-database this is deprecated and must > be removed. When did this happen? Where is it documented? The ScriptletSnippets wiki page still says to use it for applications with a MIME Type definition. As it happens, this package doesn't have a MIME Type definition, so I've removed the update-desktop-database calls, but I'd like to know more about the deprecation. > * no %doc, not even for COPYING! Whoops. Fixed. > * unowned dirs: /usr/share/omf /usr/share/gnome /use/gnome/help, I know this > is somwhat controversial, but lat doesnot depend on any packages which provide > these dirs, so it should own them. Feel free to discuss this on f-e-l if you > disagree. I don't disagree. Fixed. > * /usr/pixmaps/lat.png must be moved to /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps/ > in %install and then the icon-cache should be properly updated in %post and > %postun (see wiki scriptlets page). Done. > Should fix: > =========== > * in %install you write: > # remove libtool archives > /usr/bin/find %{buildroot}%{_libdir} -name '*.la' -exec %{__rm} -f {} \; > > This is a mono app, does it install .la files? This was a hangover from the upstream spec file, and I've removed it. I've also disabled the creation of the debuginfo package (which would be empty), added a missing buildreq of gettext, and replaced the %{_libdir} mono hack with something a little less horrible. New spec, SRPM, and FC5 i386 RPM available here: http://www.city-fan.org/~paul/extras/lat/ -- 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