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=488995 --- Comment #2 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <rpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-03-27 05:29:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > I didn't find your surname in fas. You need a sponsor, right? > I will add the need sponsor blocker, if i am wrong, then please remove it. As you've already found out, I don't need a sponsor. > some issues: > -- > %global snap 20090209 > why global instead of define? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define And it's been ratified by FESCo already. Although in this particular case it doesn't make a difference. > -- > %{__make} > please use commands like they are, not as a macro. > make instead of %{__make} OK, but what's wrong with using macros? > -- > BuildRoot Tag > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag > your buildroot tag is not valid! OK. > -- > %defattr(644,root,root,755) > please use %defattr(-,root,root,-) Why? > -- > makro couples > please use: > $RPM_OPT_FLAGS and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > or > %{buildroot} and %{optflags} > please use one of this couples, but do not mix this. You're picky, but OK. > -- > BuildRequires: pidgin-devel > Requires: pidgin > if you have as BR pidgin-devel, then will rpm requires pidgin automaticly. > you don't need Requires: pidgin IIRC it won't, because plugins are dlopen()'d, but I'll re-check. > -- > this is a tlen plugin, so it will be need > Requires: libtlen > or?! I didn't test it, yet. No, it has its own implementation. I'm not sure if it makes sense to ask upstream to use libtlen because libtlen hasn't been updated in quite a while. -- 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