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=494073 --- Comment #6 from Jeroen van Meeuwen <kanarip@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-17 06:12:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > - Why do you %doc INSTALL? Doesn't make much sense to me. It does make sense to me as it is upstream %doc and so I ship it but it's not a big deal. > - To me it looks like the $RPM_OPT_FLAGS are not honored, following seems to > work for me so far and uses also parallel builds: > > export EXTRA_CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" > > %configure > > make %{?_smp_mflags} Fixed. > - Is there really any need to ship the static libraries? So shouldn't link > anything in Fedora anyway dynamically? This is a dependency for ISV products I'm packaging. > - Group "Applications/System"? Wouldn't "System Environment/Libraries" be a > bit better? You're right. Fixed. > - Regarding the documentation: Did you have a closer look to it, whether that > one is usable and it's not just a waste of disk space? As discussed on IRC, no detailed docs are shipped and are available online. I added a comment to the spec file to reflect that. > - Source0 should be like http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL; > use: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 > Fixed. New SPEC: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/SPECS/libvmime.spec New SRPM: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/f11/SRPMS/libvmime-0.9.0-3.fc11.src.rpm -- 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