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 bdpepple@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-17 11:13 EST ------- (In reply to comment #44) > Not necessary (which should be evident from the fact that the package built > successfully on the buildsystem). The dep chain is: > > gtk-sharp2 -> gnome-panel -> gnome-menus -> redhat-menus -> desktop-file-utils The wiki should be updated then, since this is clearly stated on the Package Guidelines as a BR. > > Also, your creatation of the directories for '%{_datadir}/gnome/help/' & > > '%{_datadir}/omf/' is incorrect, and needs to be fixed. You are taking > > ownership of the directories. Run 'rpm -qf /usr/share/mime' & > > rpm -qf /usr/share/omf' to verify this yourself. > > This is deliberate. > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-package-review/2006-June/msg01049.html I disagree with this suggestion. This hasn't been common practice, and should be forwarded to FESCO or whoever is in charge of the Packaging Guidelines (spot, I believe) before implementing. > > I've noticed that you seem to > > have problems with directories ownership, and would suggest working with your > > sponsor or a mentor to prevent this from happening on your future packages. > > What other directory ownership problems have you noticed? > Monodoc, where your taking ownership of directories (/usr/lib/mono & /usr/lib/mono/gac) which are owned by mono-core. -- 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