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=456190 --- Comment #47 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@xxxxx> 2009-03-23 02:51:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #46) > > So here's first crack at the official review (sorry that it took so long): > > > > 1.) Source files > > > > Please comment on how did you get these: > > > You mean comment where I got it in the spec file? Exactly. Like: # Get revision 1234 from SVN: # svn co -r1234 http://repoistory-url@1234 dosbox # tar --exclude .svn -czf dosbox.tar.gz dosbox > > Isn't etc/dosemu.xpm from the source tarball sufficient? > > Source3: %{name}.xpm > > > I think I got that idea from the dosbox spec file, I can change it if > necessary. Yup. Just droop the Source3 and replace %{SOURCE3} with etc/dosemu.xpm > > 2.) FreeDOS image > > > > I don't believe this is formally allowed (shipping binaries), though other > > packages do this (say, qemu includes bochs bios image). I'll ask on packaging > > list how to deal with this and let you know. > > > ok, I guess I overlooked it as shipping binaries because it was just a freedos > image. I hope it will be ok. I guess so as well. I've just sent a message: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2009-March/msg00053.html > I have uploaded the latest RPM packages and spec file here: > http://jzygmont.fedorapeople.org/dosemu.spec Seems fine. Thanks for resolving those issues, let's do the rest (and... wait for the reply to the binary image issue). -- 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