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=586473 Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx --- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola@xxxxxx> 2010-04-29 11:08:33 EDT --- The package looks quite good. However, I'd suggest adding LDFLAGS="%{optflags}" to the make phase, so that the RPM optimization flags are also used in linking (although currently it might not make any difference). Note that you are now mixing styles, which is not allowed. [Actually, this is Terje's fault :)] Just switch from %{optflags} to $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. Or, change $RPM_BUILD_ROOT to %{buildroot}, whichever you prefer. In Fedora packages are not sponsored - packagers are. Have you made any other submissions? Have you made any informal reviews of other packages? As a reminder, to get packager rights you need to demonstrate your knowledge of the Fedora guidelines, most importantly http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines Additionally to the Packaging Guidelines, there are a bunch of language / application specific guidelines that are linked to in the Packaging Guidelines. Here are some tricks of the trade: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_tricks http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues -- 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