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=621416 --- Comment #6 from Volker Fröhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> 2010-08-10 18:36:57 EDT --- I've contacted upstream about the license and they'll change the file LICENSE. I altered the loop a tad, since the chmod wouldn't catch it's target. The manpages in an rpm-package don't have to be compressed? Are there different opinions on whether to keep the devel-manpages at all? Having this question pending, I haven't sorted out all issues associated with the manpages, Martin has pointed out. Sadly there are some binaries that completely lack documentation. They are new for the release. I guess, I can drop -r from the rm -rf, that only removes a single file, can I? Spec URL: http://geofrogger.net/review/libgeotiff.spec SRPM URL: http://geofrogger.net/review/libgeotiff-1.3.0-2.fc12.src.rpm -- 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