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=517520 --- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov <akurtako@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-17 09:25:47 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > Thanks for the submission. Everything looks pretty good. See comments below. > > - it would be nice to use %{buildroot} instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT but it's not > a blocker Fixed. > - my generated source tarball has a different md5sum but the contents are the > same (likely timestamp differences) I think so. > - will we build with maven once it's updated? Yes, once maven is updated to new enough version and all the needed plugins are packaged. > - other than the non-conffile-in-etc for the maven pom, everything is rpmlint > clean > - what provides %add_to_maven_depmap? I don't see it doing much in my log. Do > we need a BR on maven? It's provided by jpackage-utils so we don't need a BR on maven. > - please provide a link to the origin of the OSGi manifest Done. > > It builds fine locally for me. New links: Spec URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/easymock.spec SRPM URL: http://akurtakov.fedorapeople.org/easymock-2.5-2.fc11.src.rpm -- 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