https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1166752 --- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group) <bugs.michael@xxxxxxx> --- One src.rpm/spec per review ticket, please. That would also make it trivial to point the optional fedora-review tool at this ticket: fedora-review -b 1166752 It evaluates the "Spec URL:" and "SRPM URL:" lines, downloads the latest files, builds test-packages and runs lots of checks on them. Not limited to rpmlint. Give it a try yourself. > Summary: Not the worst forensics regexp engine Funny. :) Not everyone's cup of tea, though as a caveat. > Name: liblightgrep > Group: Development/Libraries The Group tag for runtime library base packages has been "System Environment/Libraries" for many years. Nowadays, the tag is optional for most target dists: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Group_tag > %package devel Only if you want/need the Group tag, for this subpackage it would be "Development/Libraries". ;-) > # FIXME: force -O3? > %configure --enable-shared --disable-static An answer to that question may be found here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags > %files devel > %doc An empty %doc does nothing and may be deleted safely (-> no side-effects!). %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/lightgrep.pc > Length: 155523804 (148M) [application/x-rpm] Does anything use this library API yet? An unused library alone isn't too useful. -- 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