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 #14 from Jonathan Dieter <jdieter@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-04-26 13:50:55 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) > Sorry for the late answer, I had quite a lot of work these last days. > > The systemd file looks fine to me, but the specific scriptlets are missing. You > can have a look at this page to fix it: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Systemd Fixed, thanks for the catch. > Since you will make this package available for EL, you'll need a SysV service > file too. Do you intend to provide different spec files for EL and Fedora > branches, or to use a unique spec file with version conditions? I've put together a SysV script, but I'm going to do totally different spec files, mainly because of the differences between the SysV scriptlets and systemd scriptlets. I feel that having conditionals for such a huge change makes the spec file less readable. > Be careful no to mix macro and variable style in your spec file: you should not > use %{optflags} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT together: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Using_.25.7Bbuildroot.7D_and_.25.7Boptflags.7D_vs_.24RPM_BUILD_ROOT_and_.24RPM_OPT_FLAGS Fixed. Again, thanks for the catch. > The Provides you set is a really good idea, but don't forget to specify also > the release to avoid any ambiguity in the dep solving: > Provides: novacomd = %{version}-%{release} Fixed. > Once these issues fixed I will approve at last this package. > > I forget a last point: since gcc is part of the implicit BuildRequires, you > don't need to add glibc-devel to the list of BR: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Exceptions_2 This line has now been removed. -- 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