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=760033 --- Comment #7 from Gregor Tätzner <gregor@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-12-21 06:18:19 EST --- Spec URL: http://brummbq.fedorapeople.org/kde-plasma-publictransport.spec SRPM Url: http://brummbq.fedorapeople.org/kde-plasma-publictransport-0.10-0.2.20111204git.fc16.src.rpm Thank you for your feedback. (In reply to comment #6) > > Release: %{snapshot}%{?dist}.1 > should be: > Release: 0.1.%{snapshot}%{?dist} > The next builds should then be 0.2.%{snapshot}%{?dist}, 0.3.%{snapshot}%{?dist} > etc. done > BuildRequires are global, so I'd list them all together at the beginning (but > putting them where you put them works, too). done > > #remove executable bit > > chmod 644 %{buildroot}/%{_kde4_datadir}/applications/kde4/timetablemate.desktop > > Not sure about that one… We don't normally do this, i.e. we keep the +x bit > upstream sets, but some non-KDE folks want us to do what you did everywhere. In > practice, it will work either way because KDE Plasma does not require the +x > bit in the standard prefix. So, I'll leave it as it is. Otherwise rpmlint is complaining. > You put the icon scriptlets into the main package and the actual icons > into -libs. They should be in the same package. (IMHO in the main package. > Those icons shouldn't be multilibbed.) The problem is, in libs subpackage are also icons for timetablemate included. This means I can't move them all together into the main package because timetable doesn't need the rest of the main package. Well, and I was too lazy to split up the icons suitably :) (Probably I would make horrible mistakes) -- 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