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=512217 --- Comment #6 from Christoph Wickert <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-17 12:46:16 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > Hi Dominic, Jochen, > > Removing the docdir congifure option is totally the wrong thing to do - not ALL > of the doc files are empty, only some of them. Removing the empty files would > be more appropriate. Instead of installing all files and removing some of them later IMO one can better remove them all from the wrong location and then use the %doc directive to install the ones needed: %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT make install -p DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_docdir}/%{name} ... %files -f %{name}.lang %defattr(-,root,root,-) %doc AUTHORS ChangeLog All-the-non-empty-files-you-need > 1, it's a little bit disingenious to remove the changelog attribution to the > work done by Pierre Yvess and myself in generating the spec file prior to > review. I fully agree with you. This spec is based on the old one from bug 512216 and this fact should be visible in to all users. (In reply to comment #5) > Also, please try to use %{name} rather than "geany-plugins" in the file list. Why? The guidelines only demand that macro usage is consistent. This means not to mix e. g. %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. The rest is up to the maintainer. Last but not least I suggest to split this package into different subpackages. -- 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