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=668052 Tomas Mraz <tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review?, | |needinfo?(stefanb@xxxxxxxxx | |m) --- Comment #1 from Tomas Mraz <tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-01-14 05:07:17 EST --- There are multiple problems with the package. For the first look: 1. Only a static library is built. Fedora discourages shipping static libraries except for well defined cases. The biggest problem is then if you want to add/modify a package in Fedora that would use this static library. You would have to obtain explicit exception from FESCo to allow this. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries I suggest to modify the build process of libtpms to create shared libraries if there are not really compelling reasons why it shouldn't or can't be done. 2. RPM_OPT_FLAGS are not properly passed to compiler during the build. 3. This is only a cosmetic issue - the tarball unpacks to a src directory. It is confusing when you look it up in the BUILD directory of rpmbuild, can you either create a libtpms directory first and unpack the tarball inside it with %setup or rename the src directory after the unpacking? 4. Another cosmetic issue - use %setup -q option. 5. Please add an appropriate URL tag. -- 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