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 aportal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-09-29 07:20 EST ------- (In reply to comment #19) > 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 . No. KDE recently changed /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/common in /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/docs/common. See https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-September/msg00794.html and some follow up. > 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. No, this is an error, the second should be %{SOURCE4} > 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). I don't know how to choose a number. This configuration is taken from http://piklab.sourceforge.net/support.php section "for distributions using udev and PAM. -- 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