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=560169 --- Comment #3 from Victor G. Vasilyev <victor.vasilyev@xxxxxxx> 2010-02-08 20:14:24 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) > The following line doesn't work as intended: > find -name '*.jar' -o -name '*.class' -exec rm -f '{}' \; > > You can replace it w/ this: > find \( -name '*.jar' -o -name '*.class' \) -exec rm -rf {} \; > fixed according to the Specfile Template for ant https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#ant_2 > > Also I was able to compile the bytelist rpm w/ the java-gcj features. See the > guidelines / my bytelist spec for how to do so: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GCJGuidelines > http://mo.morsi.org/files/jruby/bytelist.spec > Clarification why the gcj bits was removed is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560170#c5 Also, please note, the Specfile Template for ant doesn't contain gcj bits. > > As far as the changelog you have a typo, "Jun 2010" should be "Jan 2010". > fixed. > Also why did you remove the previous entries from the changelog > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/bytelist/F-11/bytelist.spec?view=markup fixed. The second release is prepared for review: Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/bytelist.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/bytelist-1.0.3-2.fc13.src.rpm -- 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