Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: csound - music synthesis system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203217 ------- Additional Comments From paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-08-24 16:40 EST ------- I'm a tad concerned that it's redefining printf for some reason in a HELL of a lot of files. It seems to be coming from h/csoundCore.h line 119 rpmlint warnings. src.rpm is clean csound-5.03.0-2 : W: csound no-soname %{_libdir}/lib_csnd.so (should this not be in the -devel package? csound-devel : W: csound-devel no-docs (can be ignored) csound-python: W: dangling-symlink %{_libdir}/python2.4/site-packages/_csnd.so %{_libdir}/lib_csnd.so csound-python: W: symlink-should-be-relative %{_libdir}/python2.4/site-packages/_csnd.so %{_libdir}/lib_csnd.so csound-java: W: no-soname %{_libdir}/lib_jsound.so W: no-docs W: symlink-should-be-relative %{_datadir}/java/csnd.jar %{_libdir}/csound/java/csnd.jar csound-tk: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib W: no docs csound-debuginfo: clean For the missing .so files, these really should be in the csound-devel package (and java-devel package). The tk Error must be attended to. Your specfile is also missing Requires(post and postun): /sbin/ldconfig Does the package not come with other vocabulary languages? If this is for the OLPC programme, then it makes sense for translations to be in there! In %files... The %{_bindir} entries can be globbed to make things easier to read (or better still, a simple for loop on the package names. In %files devel %{_includedir}/%{name}/* Need to be changed to %{includedir}/%{name}/ to take ownership of the directory and files In %files tk I'm not sure about the .tk files in %{_libdir}. Is this the correct place for them? csound is currently building in mock - I'll report back when it's done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review