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=522979 --- Comment #2 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michael.silvanus@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-09-21 18:38:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > * FAIL: build dependencies complete > lua >= %{luaver} should be in BR for %check to work. The lua package actually > is pulled in (cf. root.log from scratch build below), but this is only > intermediate, should be included directly as BR. That's a good suggestion. lua is pulled in right now because rpm-libs depend on it, but making this explicit would be a good idea. > * FAIL: macros used consistently > Most of the time you use %{dir} macros, but then you use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, > should be %{buildroot} Non-issue, as in lua-json, but again, I can change this if you insist. > Question: > Is the koji scratch build enough to assert "package builds in mock on all > architectures"? Enough, yes. Well, all primary architectures: Koji builds on %{ix86}, x86_64, ppc and ppc64. Sometimes the package has to be modified later because the ARM and SPARC porting projects report errors, but that cannot be done during review. > Preventing approval: > - BR lua missing > - Inconsistent macro usage (I know that's debatable, but the guidelines state > that you should stick to one type or the other) One style or another for buildroot, I think. That's my interpretation anyway :) SRPM updated, at the same location. -- 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