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=575485 --- Comment #2 from Alex Orlandi <nyrk71@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-03-23 04:29:26 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > Hey Alex. I'd be happy to review this for you. > > OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines > OK - Spec file matches base package name. > [...cut...] > OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or > /usr/sbin > > Issues: > > 1. The .so files are not quite right here. > > the .so should be in the devel subpackage. > The versioning is odd also, as they have: > > libhpdf-2.1.0.so instead of libhpdf.so.2.1.0 ? > > I guess it might be ok to have *.so in the devel package and *-2.1.0.so in the > main pkg? - you are right: the .so versioning is odd; anyway I put .so in devel and -2.1.0 in the main one > Do any of the demo programs work if you do this? - yes, they do (after the modification mentioned above) > 2. rpmlint says: > > libharu.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding > /usr/share/doc/libharu-2.1.0/README > [...cut...] > libharu-devel.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding > /usr/share/doc/libharu-devel-2.1.0/CHANGES > > This can be ignored, but you should probibly not include those both in both > files. > The base file should be fine, as thats required by the devel package. - removed CHANGES and README from devel pkg > libharu-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package > > This seems like it might be fallout from the weird library naming. ;( - resolved enabling --enable-debug in configure > 3. Please don't include the INSTALL file. There is no need to tell people how > to build the file if they are installing the package. - INSTALL file removed > 4. Is it worth including the demos in the devel package as doc files? - yes, it is :-) Included underd doc/ in devel pkg -- 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