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: fonts-sinhala https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197189 ------- Additional Comments From paskalis@xxxxxxxxx 2006-07-05 06:29 EST ------- Some comments regarding the spec file: > BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-root Please use the recommended BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) > Prereq: fontconfig This is not necessary in font packages, since they could be installed in systems without fontconfig. See a policy explanation in http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-May/msg00887.html Moreover, provisions are made in the spec file to check the presense of fc-cache before running it. > # %%ghost the fonts.cache-1 file > touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/fonts/sinhala/fonts.cache-1 > %ghost %{_datadir}/fonts/sinhala/fonts.cache-1 This is not necessary for fontconfig > 2.3.93, i.e. for FC>=5. If this package is intended for Fedora >=5 only, ghosting this file is superfluous. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review