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=477338 --- Comment #3 from Pavel Alexeev <pahan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-04 15:43:01 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > A few notes : > > - License is PHP, not BSD (according to pecl.php.net) Off course. It has initialy 'PHP License' which is not correct, and I erroneously wasn't find "PHP" in list... > - must use %setup -q -c (to not have package.xml outside the build tree) Ok, I add -c flag > - missing require for ABI check : php(zend-abi) Hm... I fully borrow %if...%endif statement for that from your spec-file... Updated later: I found this in doc by link provided by you. > - should use %{pecl_install} and %{pecl_uninstall} when exists Ok. This is good note, thank you. > - why PEAR in sumnary ? Because description from it. Right, removed. > - should add example directory in %doc (rather than each files) Ok. > Read : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/PHP Thanks a lot. (In reply to comment #2) > Also > - use %{php_extdir} instead of %{_libdir}/php/modules > - use %{pecl_xmldir} instead of your %{xmldir} Done. > As the package is available in my little testing repo, you can have a look to > http://rpms.famillecollet.com/SPEC/php-pecl-imagick.spec Yes, I have seen this new in your blog. Thank you for help. Your spec-file was very useful , but it also has some shortcomings (such as undocumented options documented only what its is undocumented :) in config, created from SPEC...) http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora9/php-pecl-imagick/php-pecl-imagick-2.2.1-2.fc9.src.rpm -- 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