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=576431 Tomas Mraz <tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(rebus@xxxxxxxxx) --- Comment #23 from Tomas Mraz <tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-04-21 08:35:24 EDT --- A few more notes: I am not sure that including the string-inl.h as %doc is correct as the guideline says "If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. If the source package does not include the text of the license(s), the packager should contact upstream and encourage them to correct this mistake." The license is not in its own file. You have it also twice in the %files. I see you workaround some problem with FORTIFY_SOURCE, is that really needed? I do not see any warning. It would be much better to fix the problematic code if possible. -- 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