https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1090499 --- Comment #2 from Pavel Šimerda (pavlix) <psimerda@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Created attachment 889255 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=889255&action=edit changes (In reply to Michael Schwendt from comment #1) > > URL: https://sourceware.org/netresolve/ > > Forbidden > You don't have permission to access /netresolve/ on this server. Yes, the upstream website hasn't been launched yet but I received numerous requests to come up with a Fedora package. > > Source0: netresolve-0.0.1.tar.xz > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Referencing_Source It is a git snapshot and the sourceware git doesn't offer tarballs. I already contacted sourceware maintainers about it. > > %package devel > > Summary: Development files for getdns > > Group: Development/Libraries > > If you set the optional Group tag for this subpackage, why is it missing in > the base package? "Group: System Environment/Libraries" > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Group_tag Added. > > Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package Fixed. > > Requires: pkgconfig > > There are automatic pkgconfig dependencies for a long time. Query the built > packages. You would only need this explicit dep for EL5. But the package > does not include any .pc file, so the dependency is superfluous currently. Removed. > > %post > > /sbin/ldconfig > > > > %postun > > /sbin/ldconfig > > If you don't to execute anything else, consider executing ldconfig directly > instead of running it within a /bin/sh script: > > %post -p /sbin/ldconfig > > %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig Done. > > %doc NEWS COPYING > > Why not include README and TODO? Added. > Instead, the NEWS file contents are rather useless so far. Let's get ready for the releases. > Btw, it declares this as "0.0.1", but if there is a 0.0.1 release, the RPM > package ought not apply the pre-release snapshot versioning scheme, but > apply the post-release versioning scheme: This is a 0.0.1 pre-release package, no release exists, yet. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning > > > > PKG_CHECK_MODULES([ARES], [libcares]) > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging: > Guidelines#BuildRequires_based_on_pkg-config Fixed. > > build.log > > Output is non-verbose. One cannot see whether Fedora's %optflags are used, > for example, and one cannot verify the compiler/preprocessor settings. Fixed. > Is the included "tests" directory suitable for running it at build-time in > the spec %check section? Definitely yes. > > checking for ARES... yes > > checking for ub_ctx_create in -llibunbound... no > > This check fails, but it linked with libunbound nevertheless. Suspicious. Fixed upstream. https://sourceware.org/git/?p=netresolve.git;a=commitdiff;h=371bf5d950a579625d474c8526e6a4cf3688f73c Will attach new spec and srpm later. -- 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