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=458866 Björn Persson <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #4 from Björn Persson <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-06 17:42:38 EDT --- · I don't see the point in first including %{buildroot} in both PREFIX and DESTDIR and then hacking around the doubled buildroot that this causes. As far as I can see the build works just as well without %{buildroot} in PREFIX. It eliminates the need for the hack and makes RPMlint happy. · The guidelines say you shouldn't use both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. Choose one or the other and stick to it. (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Using_.25.7Bbuildroot.7D_and_.25.7Boptflags.7D_vs_.24RPM_BUILD_ROOT_and_.24RPM_OPT_FLAGS) · You changed "rm" to "%{__rm}", so to be consistent you should use "%{__chmod}" as well. (There doesn't seem to be a corresponding macro for "find".) Why do you use these macros by the way? What value do they add? · According to the Perl packaging guidelines you shouldn't require Perl packages directly by name, but instead require the Perl modules by the "perl(Foo)" naming scheme. (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Perl#Perl_Requires_and_Provides) · Most of the explicit dependencies seem unnecessary, because RPMbuild will add dependencies automatically. ("Requires:" that is, not "BuildRequires:") · Please replace the tabs in the spec with spaces. They make the file look ugly in my editor, and in my web browser too. Apparently your editor has a different idea of tab width than mine. -- 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