Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874980 --- Comment #6 from Alec Leamas <leamas.alec@xxxxxxxxx> --- OK, here we go! I'm aware that compilers are tricky, so please enlighten me if I'm just wrong... Some initial remarks: - The srpm link seems dead (error 404 for me). I rebuilt from spec for now. - I cannot find and GPL or MIT licensing in the sources at a quick glance. Could you comment on why the License: is "GPLv2 and BSD and MIT"? (the tests are not part of the binary RPM:s, so test licenses does not apply AFAIK). - Here is a -static subpackage. Could you comment on why this is indeed necessary? [5] - Are the %{optflags} really in effect as required in [6] ? - We have have rpmlint rpath warnings need to be dealt with [1]. - We have some header files under /usr/include. Shouldn't these go to a - -devel pkg as well as /usr/lib/libchicken.so? [2] - The package Provides: a lot of private libs under /usr/lib/chicken/6 which need to be filtered, see [3] and [4]. - The package chicken-doc is arched and will thus be duplicated in repos. Shouldn't it be noarch? - Use a wildcard as manpage extension (not .gz) as this might change. - rpmlint no-manual-page-for-binary can be ignored. - The private so-files files are generating rmplint devel-file-in-non-devel-package. These can be ignored. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath [2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering [4] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/189 [5] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries [6] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mZ1r5649cS&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review