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=555160 --- Comment #5 from David A. Wheeler <dwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-01-18 18:34:54 EST --- > The automatic Requires generator did NOT pick [up gzip]. Okay. Could you please insert a comment above the Requires: documenting that the gzip is not automatically picked up by rpm, e.g., something like: # gzip required; rpm can't determine this because it is hidden in C code app.c. As noted in comment 4, the permissions are fine, so no change to the package is needed for permissions. Could you please add a comment to the spec file explaining why the *base* package has no license file? Anyone running rpmlint on this package will notice this issue, so let's head off that problem now. Something like this: # The license file is placed in the "-libs" package, not the base package, # because the "-libs" package is always installed when any of these packages # are installed, but it's possible to install -libs without the base. > I considered adding http://fmv.jku.at/papers/Biere-JSAT08.pdf as documentation, but I'm not sure it would really help. It talks about internal optimizations, rather than external interfaces. Never mind the internal documentation. I agree with you, that won't help. Here's an alternative. I wrote up a short man page, based on "picosat -h" and the documentation I wrote for minisat2. Would you please add it to the package (installed as with any man page), and submit it to upstream for them to consider adding in a future version? It doesn't solve the universe's problems, but it's hard to use programs with ZERO documentation: http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/picosat.1 (Technically documentation is only a SHOULD, but it's an important SHOULD, and I'd rather there be SOMETHING useful.) -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review