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: ntop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197198 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-30 02:59 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > to save some time and maybe some help :) Well, I regret having to say this, but, ATM, this package is quite far from being ready for approval. > rpmlint output: > > [mjk@fuzzy SPECS]$ rpmlint /home/mjk/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/ntop-3.2-2.i386.rpm I presume, you'll be addressing them ... ;) > I wasn't sure if the *.so files should be split into a devel package or not. Well, this package applies a rather weird SONAME'ing scheme. => The %{_libdir}/lib*-<version>.so's should be part of the main package. => The %{_libdir}/lib*.so (without version inside) should be made part of a devel package or not be installed at all. Without the package providing an API (headers) to the libraries, installing the lib*.so's would be pointless. => The *.so inside of the plugin dir seem to be needed. Finally, ... given what I see, I am not sure, I want to see this package in Fedora :( -- 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