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=485652 --- Comment #9 from Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-06-10 17:24:29 EDT --- "Yes, your spec file provides some lines to the Fedora spec file, especially the patches." Well, yes, the fact that the comments and filenames are exactly the same was a bit of a giveaway ;). Also the fact that you took the string literal fix, which would usually never be noticed on Fedora because it's set to be a warning, not an error as it is in Mandriva. "In my spec file the following line takes care about the .la files find %{buildroot} -name '*.la' -exec rm -f {} ';'" Ah, sorry, missed that bit. "It's good to have versioned plugins ;-)" Not sure if you're serious or not there...there's usually no point versioning 'libraries' that are really private plugins for a certain app, because there's just no use case for it. I should ask upstream for clarification there. "Aout the map: I personally see no reason to include a sample map because this blow the package size up and have only gain for a few users." I like including it because, if you don't, if you run navit with a default configuration, you see...nothing. It looks like the app's broken. At least with the default map, when you run Navit with a default configuration, you see something, you know it works. (Does current SVN work for you, btw? I'd be interested to know.) -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- 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