https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=845110 Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> --- A few really minor things: * Don't use %makeinstall, use "make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install" * There is no need to rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT as the first step in %install, that happens automatically in all Fedora RPM versions now. * %defattr(-,root,root) is the default in all %files lists in all Fedora RPM versions now, so it can be omitted. * %clean with a body of rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT is the default in all Fedora RPM versions now, so it can be omitted. * Buildroot is no longer definable in the spec file, it is forced to a sane default for all RPM builds in all Fedora RPM versions now, so it can be omitted. * Explicit Requires for architecture specific packages should specify %{?_isa} as part of the Requires. This translates into changing this: Requires: %{name} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release} zlib-devel pkgconfig to Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release} zlib-devel%{?_isa} pkgconfig%{?_isa} This tells yum (and any depsolver) that we want the zlib-devel that matches our built package's architecture type and bitsize, and that other multilib packages which match the explicit requires in name only (think i686 vs x86_64) are not valid to meet this Requires. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Requires ***** If you make those changes, I will be able to approve this package. -- 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