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=658234 Volker FrÃhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |volker27@xxxxxx --- Comment #2 from Volker FrÃhlich <volker27@xxxxxx> 2010-12-03 08:03:13 EST --- "grasspath" is statically set to GRASS version 6.4. The BRs only require it to be 6.3. The specific versions are also likely not necessary, since no supported version of Fedora ships a lower one. I don't know about EPEL though. You can also drop BR grass-libs, since grass-devel requires it. RPM will create all your Requires itself, so you don't need them. You'll only need GRASS as Require, since the libraries are in an independent package, I think. Don't mix %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT on your spec files. Just stick with either. The preferred build root syntax is also the first one from this list: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#BuildRoot_tag The -n option is not necessary for %setup, since the package is exactly called as expected. Please replace names and paths with %{name} and %{_bindir} in %configure. It seems to me, the configure options are not needed, besides --with-autoload, maybe. Drop the last paragraph from the description, as it is of no interest for the user. Maybe even the second too. The README file only contains information about installation, so it should not be included. The files section can also be simplified to %{_libdir}/%{name} instead of the three lines starting with %{_libdir}. I didn't look into the install, post and postun sections yet. -- 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