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=618451 --- Comment #17 from Dave Malcolm <dmalcolm@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-08-04 12:13:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) Thanks. > The comment at the top is no longer valid, but there is still no reason to > create debuginfo here (it would be empty), as this is a architecture indepedent > payload in an arch specific package (to match glibc). It would be nice to > update that comment to reflect the actual reason for disabling debuginfo. Fixed > > Also, the license tag is still invalid (should be LGPLv2+ and Python). Plus, > you don't include copies of the License text. Given that you're upstream on > this, you must do this (and package them as %doc). You should also do a proper > header attribution of LGPLv2+ in your source files (with the exception of the > Python licensed file(s), of course), like this: Fixed: I've added license files to the upstream tarball and to %doc, and added license headers (see http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=gdb-heap.git;a=commitdiff;h=08b5cf99c649d1e3c129b4350d67075f00fc5dd3 ) (snip) > Last, rpmlint says: > > gdb-heap.src:47: W: macro-in-comment %{_isa} > gdb-heap.src:47: W: macro-in-comment %{glibc_version} Fixed: I removed/rewrote that comment (snip) Updated specfile: http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/python-packaging/gdb-heap.spec Updated SRPM: http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/python-packaging/gdb-heap-0.4-1.fc12.src.rpm Changes in specfile: http://dmalcolm.fedorapeople.org/python-packaging/gdb-heap-from-0.3-1-to-0.4-1.diff -- 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