https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949317 Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #3 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Eduardo Echeverria from comment #2) > There are some issues in fedora-review which appear to be false positives > - Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch > See: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Architecture_Support > this package contains C extensions, therefore are dependent arch The package is not marked as noarch as far as I can say, but the -doc subpackage should be noarch IMO. BTW why is there "ExcludeArch: ppc ppc64"? Is that known that these package does not work on PPC? Sorry, I did not checked, I'm just wondering. > - Compiler flags do not honor fedora specific. please add > export CONFIGURE_ARGS="--with-cflags='%{optflags}'" > above %gem_install The CONFIGURE_ARGS variable now part of %gem_install macro, so it is OK to be omitted. * Please use %{gem_instdir} in place of %{gem_dir}/gems/%{gem_name}-%{version}/ - We have macro for this construct, no need to be so verbose - Moreover, we use to prepend %dir to this macro and include the content of this directory explicitly. Although it is more work, it gives you a bit more fine grained control during updates, what goes into package and what was changed, etc. -- 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=7VNPRFiTxn&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review