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=462521 --- Comment #3 from John Guthrie <guthrie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-06 15:44:20 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > (Using Jason Tibbitts' review template from > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tibbs/Review_Template) > > [-] source files match upstream: > I followed the instructions in the spec file and ended up with > something with a different md5sum than the file in the SRPM. The > readme.txt and gpl.txt files do match though > > You could just use the upstream .zip file directly, though. Just change > your %setup line to > %setup -q -c %{name}-%{version} > and it'll create the directory when it needs to. That would probably make my life noticeably easier. > [-] latest version is being packaged. > It looks like upstream has released 0.12.5 That's not too surprising since I first posted this review request 4.5 months ago. Let me download the new source and rebuild. > [-] Package doesn't run > I recommend creating a small shell script to run the program with the > correct CLASSPATH -- if you just try to run the jar file, it doesn't > find the gnu-regexp classes. > > Something like this: > > #!/bin/sh > > exec java -cp `build-classpath gnu-regexp javahelp2 simplyhtml` \ > com.lightdev.app.shtm.App When and where would I want to do this? During compile-time perhaps? (There are other blockers that I haven't addressed in this message. I was just picking a few blockers to deal with at first.) I will post a new SRPM and spec soon. -- 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