Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894338 --- Comment #10 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> --- > Or maybe you're contradicting yourself or not being clear enough. Not at all. Eric will be able to explain it to you, because it is his review you misunderstood to begin with. > "...it doesn't happen for the "silently" updated Spec file anymore I've downloaded _two_ src.rpms from this ticket, and the second one still was suffering from the same problem. If you continue to publish updates silently in an attempt to fix issues reported to you, you need to accept that reviewers still refer to older files: $ md5sum libdistorm-3.3-1.fc18.src.rpm beac57444a21349c4a65c76f0e81cebc libdistorm-3.3-1.fc18.src.rpm Build Date: Mon 14 Jan 2013 05:26:20 PM CET That's why it's common practice to update the Release tag *and* to maintain a %changelog section in the spec file. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FrequentlyMadeMistakes > Why is it better than: > > rm -fr %{_builddir}/distorm3 > unzip %{SOURCE0} > %setup -q -n distorm3/make/linux -D -T Nobody claimed anything would be "better". I only pointed out that your %prep section didn't work well and suggested a cleaner working one. Your latest one still isn't pretty, and the top builddir is still not related to %name-%version, but if it works and if you like it so much, nobody would object. ;-) What's the status of the package here now? -- 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=OHB37c0aQU&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review