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=809114 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Dieter <jdieter@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-04-02 11:30:59 EDT --- Thanks much for your willingness to review. Comments inline. (In reply to comment #1) > I'd be glad to review it, since I'm having a WebOS device. Just some comments: > - %defattr in %files is useless now: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions Ok, will fix in next revision. > - %clean section, as well as buildroot cleaning in %install and the BuildRoot > tag, is useless too: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag I'll probably leave this in as I'd like to build this for EPEL-5 > - it looks like the sources provide an Upstart service file. This service was > also available in the binary packages delivered by HP: > > https://developer.palm.com/content/resources/develop/sdk_pdk_download.html#linux > I think you should write a very simple Systemd file to launch novacomd at > startup for this package. That's a very good idea, though I was wondering about possibly setting up socket activation for novacomd. Novacom is a separate review (as they have separate upstreams) and is available at bug 809116. I have wondered whether it would make sense to package novacomd as novacom-server, novacom as novacom-client and have a metapackage, novacom, that installs both. What do you think? -- 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