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=616193 Mads Kiilerich <mads@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mads@xxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #3 from Mads Kiilerich <mads@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-07-22 21:50:07 EDT --- Some brief comments from reading through the spec follows. Some of it is duplicate of what is said on bug 603481, but some of it might explain something (not) there. > License: BSD and GPLv2+ The project as whole is GPLv2+ even though some parts "just" are GPL-compatible. (Just like glibc doesn't mention BSD despite /usr/share/doc/glibc-2.12/LICENSES.) > %description > FreeRDP is a X Remote Desktop Protocol Client for Windows Terminal Servers. > It is a fork of the rdesktop project that intends to rapidly start moving > forward and implement features that rdesktop lacks the most. Actually, FreeRDP is the project, libfreerdp is the library, and xfreerdp is the X client. (I have tried to convince upstream to create a simple client on each platform and call it freerdp but haven't succeeded yet.) The way it is I think it would be least confusing if the package was called xfreerdp like the binary. > BuildRequires: directfb-devel The directfb port is far from ready yet and shouldn't be packaged > BuildRequires: pcsc-lite-devel configure is lying - that isn't implemented yet / any longer. > BuildRequires: libsamplerate-devel > BuildRequires: libao-devel > # not enabled by default cause it does not yet work > %{?_with_libvncserver:BuildRequires: libvncserver-devel} Also old cruft that doesn't apply > Requires: pcsc-lite N/A > %package directfb N/A > %package common > Summary: Common libraries, keymaps and plugins for %{name} > Group: System Environment/Libraries > > %description common > The %{name}-common package contains common libraries, keymaps and plugins for > %{name} and %{name}-directfb. It is mostly the core freerdp lib, so shouldn't it be called something with lib instead? I also find it confusing that the -devel package is for a -common package. > %prep > %setup -q > > > %build > %configure --enable-smartcard --with-dfb N/A N/A > --disable-static \ good idea > %{?_with_libvncserver:--with-libvncserver} N/A > sed -i 's|^hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=.*|hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=""|g' libtool > sed -i 's|^runpath_var=LD_RUN_PATH|runpath_var=DIE_RPATH_DIE|g' libtool Are they really needed? AFAICS my packages without this hack don't have any issues. > %install > rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL='install -p' AFAIK -p isn't required by the guidelines. Just doing it on the packages where the maintainer cares seems a bit odd. > %doc AUTHORS COPYING README doc/{ChangeLog,TODO,rdp-keyboard.odg,*.txt} Most of these files are outdated and no longer applies -- 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