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=577601 Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-04-08 10:02:21 EDT --- Naming: ok License: ok macros: ok but, you do have these for use: %_qt4_plugindir (instead of %_qt4_prefix/plugins) %_qt4_qmake (intead of %{_bindir}/qmake-qt4 %_qt4_datadir/mkspecs (instead of %_qt4_prefix/mkspecs) scriptlets: ok %files: ok (but it may be worth tracking lib sonames closer , to make abi breaks more obvious) SHOULD: I'd recommend adding a %{?_qt4_version:Requires: qt4%{?_isa} >= %{_qt4_version}} in the main package for paranoia. you can probably drop the %{?_qt4_version conditional, if this is going to be a fedora-only package. Pending the question about using a snapshot vs. 0.5.1, I don't see any review blockers. -- 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