Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: bzip2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225633 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus@xxxxxxx 2007-03-15 19:18 EST ------- (In reply to comment #18) > (In reply to comment #15) > > * the original soname don't follow the usual convention of a soname > > number with an integer, but I am not certain that it is right to > > modify it in fedora. It should better be changed upstream. What is > > the reasoning behind this change? > It is the upstream resolution so fedora should accept it But it is not what is done in fedora! the soname is changed in the bzip2-1.0.4-saneso.patch patch, and I question that change. Otherwise * there is no need of -p when installing generated binaries, like libbz2.a, bzip2-shared... And the static lib should be 0644. I personally like to have the -mxxx option even when it isn't stricly needed, so what I would have done is: install -m644 libbz2.a $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir} install -m755 libbz2.so.%{version} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir} install -m755 bzip2-shared $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/bzip2 install -m755 bzip2recover bzgrep bzdiff bzmore $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/ The only mandatory item here is to have -m644 on the libbz2.a install call. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review