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=498736 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-04 13:57:35 EDT --- For 2.0.5-3 (after actually rebuilding this package) * Group: - For this package: "System Environment/Libraries" is suggested. * Cleaning buildroot at %install - At %install, %buildroot should be cleaned out first (example by: -------------------------------------------------------------- %install rm -rf %{buildroot} make install \ DESTDIR=%{buildroot} INSTALL="install -p" \ install -------------------------------------------------------------- * Timestamp - Please use -------------------------------------------------------------- make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}/ INSTALL="install -p" install -------------------------------------------------------------- to keep timestamps on installed files (especially on installed header files). This method (i.e. INSTALL="install -p") usually works for Makefiles generated from recent autotools. * build error - -3 does not build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1335547 You have to remove libtool .la file at %install explicitly. * Some rpmlint issue -------------------------------------------------------------- ucommon-doc.i586: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/ucommon-doc-2.0.5/a00086_f713234fbd42ca1e50a2436c591bfa19_cgraph.map ucommon-doc.i586: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/ucommon-doc-2.0.5/a00022_bbc045601d13615d2284212f7b491bc0_cgraph.map ucommon-doc.i586: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/ucommon-doc-2.0.5/a00086_1290f048a8f9116ba2aafaafe228e702_cgraph.map ucommon-doc.i586: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/ucommon-doc-2.0.5/a00086_d20f9bc12070f452b6b872d21736174a_cgraph.map ..... ..... -------------------------------------------------------------- - Are these empty map files needed? Or is it correct that these empty files are created? ! Some notes: (In reply to comment #9) > That is a rather interesting question. Traditionally I have always shipped > static libs as part of the -devel package just in case someone does actually > want to build static linked, although I imagine is likely extremely rare to see > this happen anymore for anything produced for a mainline distro (embedded on > the other hand certainly...) outside I think of perhaps those who are creating > proprietary/source secret binaries and I have no interest in that myself. > Shipping static libs as a separate -static package seems acceptable to me, just > like the debug package is separate from devel. - If you think so, I suggest to remove static archive completely. > The reason I set attr for ucommon-config is that automake/autoconf generated > Make kept dropping the execute attribute when installing that file. - Personally, I would set permission at %install rather than using %attr like ----------------------------------------------------------------- %install .... .... chmod 0755 %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/ucommon-config ----------------------------------------------------------------- (except the case where using %attr is unavoidable like %attr(2755,root,games)) ! Note 2 - Just noting again that for sipwitch please submit a seperate review request for sipwitch. -- 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