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: geda-gschem - Electronics schematics editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204598 ------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-08-31 11:48 EST ------- First review of geda-gschem : 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines : * Naming - Maybe http://www.geda.seul.org/tools/gschem/index.html is more suitable for URL . * Use rpmlint - E: geda-gschem devel-dependency libgeda-devel E: geda-gschem explicit-lib-dependency libgeda-devel E: geda-gschem explicit-lib-dependency libstroke-devel Please explain why this package (geda-gschem) should depend on libstroke-devel and libgeda-devel. * BuildRequires: - gtk2-devel, guile-devel, gd-devel <- required by libgeda-devel - gettext-devel ... is this really required? - mesa-libGL-devel ... also, is this really required? .... by my mock build, gettext-devel and mesa-libGL-devel seems unnecessary. * Encoding - /usr/share/doc/geda-gschem-20060123/AUTHORS is encoded in ISO-8859-1 and includes non-ascii character(s). Change the encoding to UTF-8. * Desktop files - Well, according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets , update-desktop-database seems to be needed when desktop file includes mimetype key. * Using %{buildroot} and %{optflags} vs $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS - Mixed use is found. Please unify the usage. * Timestamps - Well, this package have many text files and xpm files so keeping timestamps is desirable. Again, try to keep timestamps (does this package accept 'make INSTALL="install -p" install' ?) * File and Directory Ownership Umm... this is somewhat complicated..... Please recheck the owning issue of directories. - the directory %{_datadir}/gEDA/bitmap is owned by both geda-gsymcheck and geda-gschem. - geda-gsymcheck has only the directory and does not have any files under the directory. So the entry %dir %{_datadir}/gEDA/bitmap can be removed from geda-gsymcheck. - Or, if the trick written above is not desirable, the owner of %dir %{_datadir}/gEDA/bitma should be geda-symbols as both geda-gsymcheck and geda-gschem requires geda-symbols. 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : = Nothing. 3. Other things I have noticed: = Nothing. -- 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