https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1287756 --- Comment #11 from jiri vanek <jvanek@xxxxxxxxxx> --- TYVM! (In reply to Michael Simacek from comment #10) > - you should use %license macro for license instead of %doc. Also, it would > be better if you didn't install the license manually and let rpmbuild handle > it (copying it into build dir in %prep and then having just `%license > LICENSE` in %files). Thanx for this hint. I utterly forgot it exists. Fixed. > Just FYI, you should have replaced <organization> with > "Red Hat" in the license. fixed in upstrea and new tag added. > - is there any specific reason to have it installed in /usr/share? If it's > supposed to be executed by the user, it should go to /usr/bin, otherwise to > /usr/libexec. My reason was that /usr/share was the only place where I found soem other lua scripts. On contrary, libexec is full of perl or so I moved it there. It is not expected to be launched by user.. hopefully... I'm half inclined to put it more public and in /usr/bin (with man page and so...) But not now. Maybe later. (once people startto ask why openjdk update requires lua...) > - you should try to preserve timestamps of the files by using -p argument of > cp fixed (via -a) > - is there some documentation for it? it would be nice if it had a manpage Not yet:( If it will ever go to path, then I will surely create man page. Right now -h/--help is working! And for testing.. feel free to get inspired by: /usr/libexec/copy_jdk_configs.lua --currentjvm "java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.66-3.b17.fc22.x86_64" --jvmdir "/usr/lib/jvm" --origname "java-1.8.0-openjdk" --origjavaver "1.8.0" --arch "x86_64" --debug true --jvmDestdir /tmp > > Package Review > ============== ... > [?]: Package functions as described. Example usage(s) posted. > [x]: Latest version is packaged. > [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. > [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains > translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. > [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported > architectures. > [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. > [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed > files. Should be fixed > [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file > [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag ... > > > Source checksums > ---------------- > https://hg.fedorahosted.org/hg/copy_jdk_configs/raw-file/copy_jdk_configs-1. > 0/copy_jdk_configs.lua : > CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : > 4ce4d594897b9f099c03302943042cc46460198b858064439ce7d33be97e0b24 > CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : > 4ce4d594897b9f099c03302943042cc46460198b858064439ce7d33be97e0b24 > https://hg.fedorahosted.org/hg/copy_jdk_configs/raw-file/copy_jdk_configs-1. > 0/LICENSE : > CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : > 44925e9dc7359ec6e978e6e7b4662785415825854f2c828f1a17694684340ecb > CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : > 44925e9dc7359ec6e978e6e7b4662785415825854f2c828f1a17694684340ecb Sources changes. I will post URLs in next comment. TY! -- 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