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: gnu-efi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225846 clumens@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEEDINFO |ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?(clumens@xxxxxxxxxx| |) | ------- Additional Comments From clumens@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-06-12 12:29 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > W: gnu-efi no-url-tag > W: gnu-efi setup-not-quiet > E: gnu-efi hardcoded-library-path in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/gnuefi > E: gnu-efi hardcoded-library-path in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/*.o > E: gnu-efi hardcoded-library-path in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/gnuefi > E: gnu-efi hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/* > > Release has no %{?dist} tag. Do we need that? I kind of like them, but I guess > it doesn't matter. > > BuildRoot needs to be the huge version: > %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) > > Use %{?_smp_mflags} if it works in %build. > > Line 19 has a trailing space. Line 30 begins with a tab. Fugly. > > In the %files section, use %defattr(-,root,root,-) > > In the %install and %files sections, use path macros. > > And you know my personal opinion on %{buildroot} vs. $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. Fixed, but can't rebuild because it's another ia64 package. -- 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