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=767985 --- Comment #4 from T.C. Hollingsworth <tchollingsworth@xxxxxxxxx> 2012-05-07 16:51:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > > %setup -q -n man-%{version}%{posttag} > > tar -zxf %SOURCE1 > > Hint: %setup can extract multiple tarballs, too: > > %setup -q -n man-%{version}%{posttag} -a1 Thanks for the tip. > > > %files > > %{_libdir}/../lib/man2html > > Really unusual. Nothing forces you to use %_libdir, especially not if the value > of this variable is not passed into the source code's build framework as an > option. So, let's see: > > > %build > > # not autoconf > > ./configure -d +fhs > > $ grep libdir configure > $ > > That custom configure script understands several options, however, and defaults > to -prefix=/usr and then derives other paths from that prefix. It hardcodes a > confdir="${confprefix}/lib" path, for example, and the Debian sources hardcode > /usr/lib, too. => Using %_libdir makes no sense. I wasn't sure the proper way to express "/usr/lib" even on x86_64, so I looked at how systemd did it (that was the first package that came to mind that also needed it). Back at the time I wrote that spec file, it did it the same way: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=systemd.git;a=blob;f=systemd.spec;h=b5affa0d9b5294f591088f62de7c0f7fd28afe8d;hb=refs/heads/f15#l369 However, it's since switched to using %{_prefix}/lib and I recall a discussion on devel that mentioned that that's the way to go too. I'll fix it. > /usr/lib/man2html > > The spec file would also be more readable when making explicit that a directory > is to be included and not a single file. A trailing slash does the trick: > > /usr/lib/man2html/ > > > * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags > > At least the CGI executables are not built with %optflags yet. I'll fix these two as well. > > * > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment > > What's the status with regard to that? Upstream is very dead; this is essentially the Debian fork of man2html. I have a comment about what each patch does (most are bugfixes to manpage parsing) and provided the patch number from Debian where relevant. -- 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