https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #124 from leigh scott <leigh123linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #122) > Some hints purely from looking at the spec and not the srpm: > > - Don't use %define, consistently use %global Done > - Don't use fuzzy patches but rebase them Done > - Don't use the %{version} in the name of patches because it means you need > to rename the patch when you package a version even if it still applies > cleanly. The version in the patch name should be hardcoded and refer to the > version where a patch was introduced. Done > - Patches should have comments and links to upstream or downstream bugs so > we can easily see if something is being upstreamed or not. > - First apply upstream patches, than downstream ones. Start downstream ones > at say %patch10 or %patch20, then you have enough room for upstream fixes. Done, I will apply my patches first then upstream, there is no guideline for this so I'm free to order them as I see fit, > - Some of the Requires and BuildRequires seem redundant Maybe, I will sort this out when time permits (The requires and buildrequires were copied from the gnome-shell spec) > - Better use install rather than cp because to make sure permissions are > correct and timestamps are preserved. Done > - use "make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL='install -p'" tp > preserve timestamps Done > - Don't hardcode directory names like /usr/share in the sed commands, use > macros Done, how do you express /usr/lib as a macro, I tried %{prefix}/lib > - The glib-compile-schemas scriptlets are wrong, they don't handle the > upgrading. Please use the ones form the wiki. Done > - The package provides a dbus service, but does not require dbus-x11. How is > dbus started then? Done - why is gnome-shell exempt from this?, is it some sort of redhat favouritism? > - Does cinnamon provide a polkit-authentication agent (password entry > dialog)? If so, add Provides: PolicyKit-authentication-agent, if not, > require it. Not done - why is gnome-shell exempt from this?, is it some sort of redhat favouritism? > - Why do you move the cinnamon settings menu entry to the "Utilities" group? I can't remember. > - Why do you remove the included *.session and xsession files and provide > your own as additional sources? Please add a comment as explanation. Cinnamon originally didn't come complete with session files so I added my own. I see no reason to use theirs as they would require fixes. > - Don't specify the manpage with full extension, use %{name}.1.* instead of > %{name}.1.gz in case we switch to another compression method. Done > - Why not simply own %{_datadir}/cinnamon/ ? If I do this I get warnings that the lang files are listed twice. -- 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