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=506339 --- Comment #13 from Milos Jakubicek <xjakub@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-06-30 17:11:14 EDT --- Orcan, I'm really sorry for my late response, but I'm having busy days now (and yes, I must have missed whatever you sent to f-d-l, sorry too). I'm generally open to any modification to the current lzma package which will help the symbiosis with xz, however, I really like the latest solution from Jindrich (only -debuginfo are conflicting, which I don't find any bad) and if nobody comes up with something we missed as far, I'm going to approve the package in a day or two. Other minor comments on packaging: * rpmlint: >rpmlint ../SRPMS/xz-4.999.8-0.5beta.fc11.src.rpm xz.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary XZ 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. >rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/xz-* xz-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation xz-lzma-compat.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/bin/lzcat xz xz-lzma-compat.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/bin/unlzma xz xz-lzma-compat.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/bin/lzma xz xz.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary XZ Those are all OK imho. xz.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 4.999.8beta-0.5 ['4.999.8-0.5beta.fc11', '4.999.8-0.5beta'] Make rpmlint happy here please, together with adding a dot as Orcan pointed out. * specfile is sane, owns all directories, proper macros * builds fine in current F11 and rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1444933 * matches upstream sources, sha256sum: 059da5a9fe51c28b38f67e5b8063a451c516f37fbb268177fd1081b70dd97f53 * handles libraries well * I have some worries regarding licensing because of the comment on upstream's homepage: "Oops! Accidentally a wrong COPYING file got included in 4.999.8beta. 4.999.8beta is still under GNU LGPL, but the first stable release will be in the public domain like the incorrectly included draft of new COPYING in 4.999.8beta already hints." Currently it is definitely *not* LGPLv2.1+ (in this case) but I'm also afraid that authors claims about becoming Public domain are not right too. Hence GPLv2+ seems to be ok to me (now). -- 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