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=723575 --- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-07-22 06:28:33 EDT --- Not a full review: > %global with_doc 1 %bcond_without doc 1 is more flexible and mighty as a default. With it you could simply toggle the %with_doc macro when building, e.g. rpmbuild --without doc ... > # Remove unneeded files. > > rm -rf "${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_datadir}/libpki" Something like this asks for an explanation in a spec file comment. It is obvious that "rm -rf" removes an entire tree, but the _why_ isn't answered. What files are in there and why are they unneeded? > #------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > %post > #------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > /sbin/ldconfig > > > #------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > %postun > #------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > /sbin/ldconfig Caution! Here you create shell scripts that contain your long '#----...' lines, because there is no way yet to decide which comment is part of the script or just the spec file. Take a look at e.g. the rpm -qp --scripts libpki-*rpm output of the built packages. If you really want to execute just ldconfig, prefer running it directly with an automatic dependency on its path instead of /bin/sh: %post -p /sbin/ldconfig %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig > %{_bindir}/pki-cert > %{_bindir}/pki-crl > %{_bindir}/pki-derenc > %{_bindir}/pki-query > %{_bindir}/pki-request > %{_bindir}/pki-siginfo > %{_bindir}/pki-tool > %{_bindir}/pki-xpair > %{_bindir}/url-tool Very generic names that bear a high risk of causing conflicts with other/future packages, especially if these tools are shipped within a library package. Just the '-' in 'pki-' and 'url-' currently creates an own namespace. However, the 'pki' and 'url' prefix is in use already: $ repoquery --whatprovides /usr/bin/pki\* pki-console-0:9.0.2-1.fc15.noarch procps-0:3.2.8-19.20110302git.fc15.x86_64 pki-setup-0:9.0.9-1.fc15.noarch pki-setup-0:9.0.7-1.fc15.noarch procps-0:3.2.8-21.20110302git.fc15.x86_64 librapi-0:0.15.1-1.fc15.i686 librapi-0:0.15.1-1.fc15.x86_64 pki-silent-0:9.0.7-1.fc15.noarch pki-console-0:9.0.3-1.fc15.noarch pki-silent-0:9.0.9-1.fc15.noarch $ yum list pki-\*|wc -l 21 $ repoquery --whatprovides /usr/bin/url\* gridsite-clients-0:1.7.15-4.fc15.x86_64 python-urlgrabber-0:3.9.1-10.fc15.noarch urlwatch-0:1.12-1.fc15.noarch urlview-0:0.9-8.fc15.x86_64 gridsite-clients-0:1.7.9-2.fc15.x86_64 Even if this library's tools plan to occupy the 'pki-' namespace for executables like this (and not the 'libpki-' namespace), it would be better to move these files into a libpki-tools or libpki-utils package, so the tools remain optional whereas the library package might be dragged in as a dependency of something. $ libpki-config --cflags -I/usr/include/libxml2 -DLINUX The libpki-devel package is missing a dependency on libxml2-devel as pki.h and several other headers include libxml headers, but the pkgconfig file explicitly depends on libxml-2.0.pc. Further, libpki.pc is broken (which also explains why the automatic .pc file dep has not been added by rpmbuild): $ cat /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libpki.pc |grep libdir libdir=/usr/lib -- 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