https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=967620 --- Comment #24 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> --- Some questions based on another brief look at the new spec file: > BuildRequires: libX11 Not libX11-devel? > %build > CFLAGS="%{optflags}" CXXFLAGS="%{optflags}" \ > ./configure --enable-shared \ > --prefix=%{buildroot}%{_prefix} \ > --libdir=%{buildroot}%{_libdir} Why isn't %configure used instead? Could you avoid using %buildroot in this section? Passing %buildroot based paths to a configure script is a common packaging pitfall, because when paths are inserted into any built files, they would contain the %buildroot prefix. Typically, you should not refer to %buildroot before the %install section. > sed -i 's|%{buildroot}||' *.pc edelib/edelib-config.h qed > %install > jam install Is "jam install" capable of installing into a buildroot? That would be the preferred solution. > %files devel > %{_libdir}/%{name}/sslib/*.ss What files are they? When are they needed? At run-time or only during development? For example, src/Scheme.cpp refers to these files. There is a hardcoded path in that file, too, which differs from the location you've packaged, and it may need further patching for targets where %_lib is not /lib: /lib/edelib/sslib > %{_libdir}/%{name}/sslib/*.ss Two "unowned" directories there: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership -- 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=KTVVbj0lxY&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review