Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208250 ------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-09-29 06:57 EST ------- Okay. Full review for piklab. 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines * Use rpmlint W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink \ /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common ../doc/common - Well, this warning itself is no problem, however, the problem is that this symlink is broken. Perhaps this should point to ../common . 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : = Nothing. 3. Other things I have noticed: - Well, /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms These two files are same. Acutally spec file says: %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \ %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \ %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms I suspect only one of these two are necessary. Also, while this is not documented, the files under /etc/security/console.perms.d/ seem to have the names like <number>-<specific name>.perms (like 50-default.perms). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review