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=478372 --- Comment #3 from D Haley <mycae@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-29 02:38:21 EDT --- SPEC URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/mathgl-2.spec SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/mathgl-1.8-2.fc10.src.rpm rpmlint output (spec, SRPM and RPM): mathgl.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libmgl-glut.so.5.0.0 exit@xxxxxxxxx 1. drop hard-coded Requires: freeglut hdf5 fltk qt these should all get picked up automatically >Done. Might be a stupid lack of understanding on my part, but I do not understand how these can be picked up automatically if the only Requires is gsl. Normally rpmlint warns if you have redundant requires. I.e if A depends on C, and you "Requires: A, C" then rpmlint says that "Requires: C" is not needed. Where is it obtaining the automatic Requires from? 2. use BuildRequires: qt4-devel (it's unambiguous which version of qt you're using) > Done. 3. static libs are preferably omitted. But if included at all (with justification), must be packaged separately, into something like %{name}-devel-static. .la files should go with the statics libs (omitted, or packaged along with the static libs) >configure now has --disable-static --enable-shared passed as a flag. 4. %_includedir/ltdl.h conflicts with system libtool-ltdl-devel. Omit from packaging >I would have found that out if i had tried to install the RPM, wouldn't I? I will add this to my pre-request checks for next time around. >Building libtool-ltdl that accompanies this package has been disabled. 5. replace %{_includedir}/mgl/*.h with (something like) %{_includedir}/mgl/ so parent dir is owned too. > Done. 6. Why does -devel have a separate (and invalid) License: GPL ? >Because I stuffed up :). Removed. Latest koji scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1024362 -- 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