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=542166 --- Comment #2 from Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@xxxxx> 2009-12-24 15:29:53 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > Hi, > > I'm not (yet) a packager, anyway I'd like to make an informal review of your > package. > > * You should not rely explicitely on OpenJDK in your BuildRequires; use > instead: > Buildrequires: java-devel >= 1:1.6.0 > as suggested in > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java#BuildRequires_and_Requires > Don't forget by the way to add a Java runtime by using: > Requires: java >= 1:1.6.0 Given the java packages don't follow uniform versioning, requiring a version with epoch will only drag in OpenJDK anyway. I'm requiring the unversioned OpenJDK so that the package works on other RPM-based platforms (openSUSE). In fact Fedora OpenJDK's generic provides should probably be fixed to provide epoch-less versions (despite the package itself providing the epoch). > Did you tried to build your package with gcj by the way? Yup. Did not work, did not bother to find out why, just switched to OpenJDK. > > * You should maybe in your javadoc subpackage add a Requires on "%{name} = > %{version}-%{release}" also, as recommended here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java#ant_2 Good point, will do once the official review is done. > Except these two points, your package seems OK. I rebuild your SRPM, it works > fine and rpmlint doesn't complains :-) Thank you. -- 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