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=608852 --- Comment #9 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-08-05 07:38:28 EDT --- Please do test your packages a little bit yourself, too. :( Reviewers are there to add another pair of eyes, but basically *you* are supposed to practise RPM packaging in accordance with Fedora's Packaging and Reviewing Guidelines. > %define gstreamer_version 0.10 > %define dbus-glib_version 0.70 > BuildRequires: gstreamer-devel > gstreamer_version > BUildRequires: dbus-glib-devel > dbus-glib_version > Requires: gstreamer > gstreamer_version This won't work. Did it even build and install? Above you defined two macros, but below you didn't use them. So: BuildRequires: gstreamer-devel > %{gstreamer_version} BUildRequires: dbus-glib-devel > %{dbus-glib_version} Requires: gstreamer > %{gstreamer_version} Further, using '>' and not '>=' is somewhat unclear. GStreamer is still in the 0.10 series for a long time, so would 0.10 be sufficient? Or does it strictly need to be > 0.10? Notice that if the package %release value is not specified in such a versioned dependency, it is left out of RPM version comparison, too. For example, 0.10-2.fc14 would not be > 0.10 Btw, for safety reasons, notice: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define > Obsoletes: epris < 0.2 A comment would be good here. There is no such "epris" provided in the Fedora package collection. *This* package is called "epris". What's the reason for the Obsoletes tag? > %files > %defattr(-,root,root,-) > %doc Absolutely no need to put an empty %doc there. -- 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