Bug 226402: Merge Review: SDL Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Component: Package Review Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx> has asked for fedora-review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226402 ------- Additional Comments from Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx> I'm behind a windows machine ATM, so no full review, but a few items to fix and a few questions to get started: SHOULDFIX items: * replace "--x-includes=/usr/include --x-libraries=/usr/%{_lib}" with "--x-includes=%{_includedir} --x-libraries=%{_libdir} * BuildRequires: nasm should be: %ifarch %{ix86}, I doubt ppc owners will be amused when they try to rebuild SDL from srpm for some reason and then need to install nasm. questions: * Why this? : "export tagname=CC" * Why add -O3 is there any bench mark proof this is benificial? * Since you now pass "--x-includes=/usr/include --x-libraries=/usr/%{_lib}", to work around configure's X-detection, do you still need: BuildRequires imake and libXt-devel? * Does devel really Requires libXt-devel? I must say all in all a pretty good specfile, I've seen much worse (both in FE as in FC). An important question when moving on with this is what todo with current bz tickets against SDL. Quite a few of them seem legitimate and not all that hard to fix. I don't know however if open bz tickets should be concidered blockers for the review. I see that someone has made one of them block this ticket, but that can be removed. AFAIK there are no rules for this, we could ask the mailinglist but that usually leads to much ado about nothing. In my opninion we should try to fix as many BZ's against SDL as possible during this review, but not let them block the review, agreed? Which brings me to the next subject one of the main reasons why I've decided to review SDL and not just any package is because I'm very active in packaging games and gaming related libraries (allegro (ask jnovy), CLanLib 0.6 and 0.8, plib) and as an experiment in co-maintainer ship between (former) FE and FC maintainers I would like to become a co-maintainer of SDL. Judging from the current open BZ tickets against SDL, of which most seem easy to fix, currently other work has higher priorities then SDL, and thus you could use a hand. I don't know howto shape this co-maintainership for now I'll try to take a look at some of the open BZ tickets and write fixes for those, notice btw that bug 217389 already contains fix I've reviewed the fix and it looks good to me. Unfortunately I currently don't have internet access at home so I'll only be able to communicate about this mon, wed, thu and fri. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review