Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477546 --- Comment #6 from manuel wolfshant <wolfy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-22 21:04:49 EDT --- It builds fine now, but I have a couple of questions: 1. what is the purpose of : lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Dec 23 03:33 /usr/bin/netdude -> netdude0.5 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 371952 Dec 23 03:33 /usr/bin/netdude0.5 instead of simply having /usr/bin/netdude as a plain binary ? 2. Why did you choose to package the header files in the -lib rpm? Am I mistaken when I think that they should go into a separate -devel package, maybe together with the content of /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/netdude ? I think that, if you want to separate the libs in their own package (BTW, is it worth the effort/ is it needed ?), a 3 package approach similar to glibc-common/glibc/glibc-devel is more appropriate. 3. rpmlint has complains about the debuginfo package: [wolfy@wolfy ~]$ rpmlint /home/wolfy/reports/netdude/netdude-debuginfo-0.5.0-2.fc11.x86_64.rpm netdude-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/src/debug/netdude-0.5.0/libltdl/.libs netdude-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/src/debug/netdude-0.5.0/libltdl/.libs Should't you delete that directory as part of the cleanup process (together with the removal of static and libtool files) ? 4. "Application" is no longer a valid category according to the latest standard for desktop files. Both http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html and Packaging/Guidelines#desktop agree on that. Could you please keep in mind to fix that, please ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review