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=491694 Gianluca Sforna <giallu@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |giallu@xxxxxxxxx --- Comment #8 from Gianluca Sforna <giallu@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-24 05:39:06 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > Changes ommitted: > * boost still included, not sure whether you were referring to the boost req or > boost-devel buildreq (or both) and if they actually will be pulled in I was referring to the Require: line. Usually, runtime dependencies are auto-detected during rpmbuild, but that is not bullet-proof. That's why I suggested we double check with a mock build. > * source0 location, essentially I checked out the code from the anyterm svn > repo trunk, added the spec, init and sysconfig scripts, made a few changes to > the code base, and then generated / submitted the srpm and spec here. I'm not > sure how exactly my changes, specifically the new files I added and the changes > to the code will be available and make my way into the codebase when listing > the hosted anyterm release tarball One review item is to check if the source tarball matches upstream sources. That's why you should, when possibile, use an unmodified upstream tarball; I usually download it with "spectool -g name.spec" and this also checks Source0: is correct Additional stuff you need to use for packaging should go either in additional "SourceX:" or "PatchX:" lines; are you saying you are not sure how to use these? -- 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