Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: compat-guichan05 - compatibility libraries for guichan https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=232873 j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx 2007-04-08 02:00 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > This makes sense as well, and I guess it would minimize the chance of breaking > other packages. I'll have to upgrade the non-compat guichan package with the > -release fix before I can submit a build for this one in order to avoid filename > conflicts. > Correct. MUST: ===== * rpmlint output is: E: compat-guichan05 obsolete-not-provided guichan E: compat-guichan05-devel only-non-binary-in-usr-lib W: compat-guichan05-devel dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/guichan-0.5/libguichan_sdl.so ../libguichan_sdl.so.0.0.0 W: compat-guichan05-devel dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/guichan-0.5/libguichan.so ../libguichan.so.0.0.0 W: compat-guichan05-devel dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/guichan-0.5/libguichan_allegro.so ../libguichan_allegro.so.0.0.0 W: compat-guichan05-devel dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/guichan-0.5/libguichan_glut.so ../libguichan_glut.so.0.0.0 W: compat-guichan05-devel dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/guichan-0.5/libguichan_opengl.so ../libguichan_opengl.so.0.0.0 These can all be ignored * Package and spec file named appropriately * Packaged according to packaging guidelines * License ok * spec file is legible and in Am. English. * Source matches upstream * Compiles and builds on devel x86_64 * BR: ok * No locales * ldconfig correctly run for shared libraries * Not relocatable * Package owns / or requires all dirs * No duplicate files & Permissions * %clean & macro usage OK * Contains code only * %doc does not affect runtime, and isn't large enough to warrent a sub package * -devel package as needed * no .desktop file required Could fix ========= * Why instead off: %dir %{_libdir}/guichan-0.5 %{_libdir}/guichan-0.5/libguichan.so %{_libdir}/guichan-0.5/libguichan_allegro.so %{_libdir}/guichan-0.5/libguichan_glut.so %{_libdir}/guichan-0.5/libguichan_opengl.so %{_libdir}/guichan-0.5/libguichan_sdl.so not just write: %{_libdir}/guichan-0.5 ? this would also be consistent with how you handle the .h files Approved! -- 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