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=754245 --- Comment #5 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-12-19 13:01:36 EST --- Scott, Thanks for all the comments. I have reduced the number of packages from 3 to 2, and have followed Debian in the selection of files for the two packages. Also, thank you very much for the useful patch. I have added it to the package. As for this comment: > 6. Stylistically, I suggest your use %{_buildroot} instead of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. > Since you're relying new rpmbuild features like "no defattr" "no %clean > section" anyway. I don't understand why you seem to be linking %{buildroot} with "new rpmbuild features". Both it and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT have been around for a long time. (For example, see http://www.redhat.com/archives/rpm-list/2002-July/msg00121.html.) In any case, all of my other spec files use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, so for the sake of maintaining a consistent style across the packages I maintain, I prefer to stick with $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. New URLs: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-menhir/ocaml-menhir.spec http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-menhir/ocaml-menhir-20111019-2.fc16.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