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: qjackctl - Qt based JACK control application https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191239 j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778, 177841 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx 2006-06-20 14:22 EST ------- (In reply to comment #19) > Fixed (in which way is makeinstall broken?, I used to not use it and then saw > spec files using it and changed over when it works - I know not all packages > will use the options it uses, is that the broken behavior?). > There currently is some interesting discussion on f-e-l (fedora-extras-list mailinglist) just search for DESTDIR in the archives, btw you really should subscribe ot f-e-l. > Spec URL: http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/extras/qjackctl.spec > SRPM URL: http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/extras/qjackctl-0.2.20-5.src.rpm > Looks good -> Approved! > (sorry about the broken link before...) No problem. > A quick question. In my specs I usually include the desktop entry inline with a > cat <<EOF, I changed that on request as the guidelines require the desktop entry > to be a separate source file. Has anyone ever pointed out that that makes it > more difficult to include a full path to the executable that will automatically > reflect whatever is in %{_prefix}? I think it is important that what I package > executes what I package and not whatever is in the path that happens to match > the executable name. Right now I'm just including "Exec=qjackctl" in the desktop > file instead of what I used to do which was "Exec=%{_bindir}/qjackctl". I could > obviously hack a "perl -p -i -e" inline script to replace a placeholder with the > real %{_bindir} but at that point I like it better inline :-) Erm, I've never though about this before. Everybody uses just the command name without a full path in the .desktop files without any problems. If there are 2 identically named binaries in different places in the path then that really is a bug. If you would like to discuss this further please do so on f-e-l, I don't feek further discussion belongs in this BZ ticket. -- 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