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=473583 --- Comment #5 from steve <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-13 19:13:26 EDT --- Debarshi, thanks for you comments. (In reply to comment #4) > + CVE-2008-2149 (patch in Debian), CVE-2008-3908 > (http://www.ocert.org/analysis/2008-014/wordnet.patch.2). Debian carries a > split version of the patch for CVE-2008-3908. > > + Please have look at the patches used in the Debian package. Some of them are > useful to have in Fedora. eg., the manual page fixes. I took a look at the debain patches and as far as I could tell, the man page that you pointed out and the security patch mentioned above were the only ones that I think were relevant to this Fedora package. Both have been included. > > + 'wordnet' might be a better name for the package because that is the name > some other distributions (eg., Debian, Ubuntu) are using. Having consistency in > naming across distributions is a good thing. Umm, although i agree that naming across distributions is a good thing, I would say naming the package as the way the original (upstream) package, is a better thing. There are a couple of other reasons: a. 'wordnet' is a common noun where as 'WordNet' refers to the actual package from princeton ...don't believe me ? Ask WordNet :) ... [steve@laptop ~]$ wn wordnet -over Overview of noun wordnet The noun wordnet has 2 senses (no senses from tagged texts) 1. wordnet -- (any of the machine-readable lexical databases modeled after the Princeton WordNet) 2. WordNet, Princeton WordNet -- (a machine-readable lexical database organized by meanings; developed at Princeton University) [steve@laptop ~]$ b. Changing the %{name} in the spec file, implies that i'd have to change the name of the included tarball, but then the "Source:" tag would not be correct (actually, i did try to change all occurrences of WordNet to wordnet in the spec, but got some errors while building, which i could not understand ...not that i didn't spent too much time on investigation). I could still rename the package if you still think it is a good thing. The new spec and source files are at: http://lonetwin.net/WordNet.spec http://lonetwin.net/WordNet-3.0-2.fc10.src.rpm - steve -- 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