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=438588 --- Comment #13 from Thomas Sailer <t.sailer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-30 09:45:09 EDT --- Update Spec URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/zfstream.spec SRPM URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/zfstream-20041202-3.fc11.src.rpm (In reply to comment #12) > The file ChangeLog can go to %doc. I don't think it is worth packaging the > LICENSE file as it doesn't say much about the license. Done and agreed. > * Patches should be explained and be submitted to upstream. Since the project > seems dead, it won't hurt to bypass the submission part. But please explain in > the SPEC file what the patch does. I have sent the patch upstream by PM (the project lacks a bug tracker). While the original author said he integrated the patch into his tree, he apparently hasn't gotten around to release a new version. > * Similarly, please give the reasoning of Source1. See comment #9. Basically because I couldn't get toc working, and furthermore allows autotools to cross-compile the lib (I have also submitted mingw32-zfstream for review). > * Please remove the duplicate copy of minizip, which we already have in Fedora, > from Source1 and adjust the BR's. Note that minizip-devel already requires > zlib-devel. Done. > * The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. The > upstream tarball has a different name. Why don't we use it? The project is named just "zfstream" on the author's homepage. It's just that the tarball has libs11n_ prefixed. s11n.net is another project by the same author, so I guess that's where the prefix comes from. zfstream however has nothing to do with s11n.net, so I found it more natural to just name the package zfstream. > * No need to explicitly BR automake. libtool does and always will pull that for > you. Done > ! Please make use of the %{name} macro. Done. > * The devel package must require "bzip2-devel", "zlib-devel or minizip-devel > (?)", and "pkgconfig" Done. I think zlib-devel is enough, as zipstream.hpp does not include anything from minizip-devel, minizip is only needed for building > ? About "touch NEWS README AUTHORS": Wasn't there an --add-missing flag to > automake? Actually, -a (which is already present) or --add-missing (the full name for -a) only adds missing files _other_ than NEWS, README and AUTHORS. So build will fail if you remove the touch. > ! No need for blank %doc's. Done. > ! Please make the descriptions span 80 columns. Shortened. -- 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