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=492501 Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Erik van Pienbroek <erik-fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-09 08:29:13 EDT --- Let's take this package for review. - The %define LIBVER can be dropped as it isn't being used elsewhere in the .spec file - The 'make check' part doesn't belong in the %build phase, but in a seperate %check phase. - Does 'LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH make check' even work? The LD_LIBRARY_PATH variable is only necessary for native libraries, so it doesn't have any effect on MinGW packages. (I haven't build and tested the package myself yet) - The libtool .la files are required for proper operation on MinGW, so these don't need to be removed - The multilib stuff isn't required as we only support 32bit environments. It can all be dropped - Why does the defattr line contain the value '0755' ? Normally it should be %defattr(-,root,root,-) -- 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