Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=903380 --- Comment #8 from Alex G. <mr.nuke.me@xxxxxxxxx> --- -- MUST -- > [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. > Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in > libint2-devel > Requires: libint2 = %{version}-%{release} This is incorrect. The -devel package dependency must be arch-specific. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package > libint2.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/libint2-2.0.0/LICENSE The LICENSE file includes the following fsf address: > Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA. The correct address is: 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA Please have upstream update their LICENSE file. -- SHOULD -- > BuildRoot: > rm -rf %{buildroot} > %defattr > %clean If you plan to also package for EPEL5, I recommend you only keep the above in the EPEL5 branch, and remove them from EPEL6 and Fedora branches. > [!]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. > Note: Documentation size is 911360 bytes in 2 files. I would recommend putting the programming manual (progman.pdf) in a separate -doc or -devel-doc package. It accounts for the majority of the size of the -devel rpm. > [!]: Uses parallel make. fedora-review identifies this as a fail. That's a flase positive. I can see 8 cc1plus processes spawn during the build. > make -C doc Can the documentation use parallel make? > %{_libdir}/libint*.so.* Please consider versioning here: %{_libdir}/libint*.so.1* This makes it very easy to catch soname version bumps, and is much safer than undiscriminately accepting any library the build spits out. -- 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=y8LYOYpVfP&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review