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=472683 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-05 13:25:39 EDT --- Well: - First of all, your srpm doesn't build on F-11: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1031148 - Please explain why you want to define %jpcap, %jpcap_version - For license tag: - No version of LGPL is specified in the codes - However some files are licensed under BSD with advertising (and BSD) So the license tag should be "LGPLv2+ and BSD with advertising" - Source must be given by full URL: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL - Please remove Vendor item. This is defined automatically when rebuilding your srpm on Fedora buildsystem. - For BuildRequires: * Please explicitly write "BuildRequires: jpackage-utils" to honor Java packaging guidelines (even if java-devel implicitly pulls in jpackage-utils dependency) (same for Requires) * "BuildRequires: libpcap" should be removed as libpcap-devel always requires it. - Please explain why you set "Autoreq: 0". - Remove all pre-compiled binaries (like foo.jar) at %prep stage to make it sure that all binaries are compiled from the source. - We now recommend %defattr(-,root,root,-) - The directory %{_libdir}/%{name} is not owned by any packages (ref: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories ) -- 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