https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047647 --- Comment #12 from Michael Schwendt <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> --- Good. If there will ever be translation files for the library, you may need to "grep" from the %name.lang file to extract what to include in the individual subpackages. [...] Issues with /usr/bin/chardet-config as packaged: * It sources the libtool archive (.la) file to define some variables, such as "libdir", and fails: /usr/bin/chardet-config: line 20: /usr/lib64/libchardet.la: No such file or directory * For its --libs option, it relies on libtool archive inter-dependencies instead of only returning -lchardet. Inter-deps in .la files are poisonous and a primary reason why those files are not included in Fedora packages. * For its --cflags option it prints the compiler flags that have been used to build libchardet. That is a mistake. Or to put it differently, since there's also a --defs option for printing preprocessor options, what --cflags prints is questionable. It should only print any _added_ flags that would be mandatory when compiling _with_ the libchardet API. * Option --defs returning -I/usr/include/chardet bears a risk, because it alters search path for headers and unhides generic header names from the chardet directory, such as "version.h". On the long term, it would be better, if the API were to be used via "#include <chardet/chardet.h>" in _standard_ search path instead of "#include <chardet.h>" in customized search path. * /usr/bin/chardet-config will conflict on multi-arch installations (e.g. x86_64) due to its hardcoded /usr/lib64 path components. While the guidelines are not too specific on multiarch conflicts, Fedora has been trying to resolve also such conflicts for several years. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Conflicts [...] * The license text must be included in the base package (and the -devel package depends on that one). https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text > Release: 5%{dist} More accurately, it's %{?dist} which allows for the %dist macro being undefined. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Version_and_Release https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Using_the_.25.7B.3Fdist.7D_Tag -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review