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=459925 --- Comment #4 from Simon Wesp <cassmodiah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-19 16:07:14 EDT --- >I reviewed this package. Thank you >But then the devel package should have > Provides: %{name}-static = %{version}-%{release} >and whenever a package BR's this one, it should BR libowfat-static instead of >libowfat-devel Done >* Requires: dietlibc-devel (the top one) is not required. Done >So you need to replace the occurences of >%{_libdir} with %{_prefix}/lib in the SPEC file. Done >* We prefer %defattr(-,root,root,-) Ooops, done >* Please use %{name}.a instead of libowfat.a in the %files section for macro >consistency. Oops, I did it again. Done >* Fedora specific compilation flags are not honored. Please fix this. Done >* Parallel make must be supported whenever possible. If it is not supported, >this should be noted in the SPEC file as a comment. Done >? Is there any program which we can use to see libowfat in action? I need libowfat for a commercial application. http://erdgeist.org/arts/software/opentracker/ http://www.mcmilk.de/wiki/Squidwall are free and opensource application which need libowfat. (perhaps i will build opentracker) >! Since we only produce a -devel package, I think its summary should be the >same as the main summary. Done SPEC: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libowfat-0.28/libowfat.spec SRPM: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libowfat-0.28/libowfat-0.28-2.fc10.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