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=476398 Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bugs.michael@xxxxxxx --- Comment #24 from Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> 2009-03-19 17:45:15 EDT --- > being rude or attacking. What do you refer to here? Comment 21? Did you consider your comment 20 as particularly nice and friendly? I found it quite arrogant, but I would have replied to you in private if I had considered it to be a real problem. Your reply about the test-suite is not much different. Nowhere before have you mentioned the failing test. No comment in the spec file at all. As soon as I point out the existance of a test-suite and provide the patch you asked for, you brush aside all this with a single sentence. A failing "make check" ought to raise an alarm bell in a packager's head. A packager should really look into it and report it upstream, too. [...] The "soname mess" is much more than rpmlint's warning about lack of sonames. Release 2.p7.fc10 of the src.rpm added non-versioned sonames, but that didn't fix the mess. 3.p7.fc10 is _much_ better, except that typically upstream developers ought to participate in the decision on what SONAMEs and versions to choose. librankntl.so.20080310 is an interesting approach, but it is different than upstream's releases and also different than all other distributions, for example. -- 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