https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321440 --- Comment #5 from Mukundan Ragavan <nonamedotc@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #4) > (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #3) > > The name looks weird to me. Why is it needed to use compat in the package > > name? > > Simply use %{pkgname}43 as the package name (without any dash). The digits > inside the name should be enough to show it's a compat package. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#CommonCharacterSet > > Maybe you'd look also into package renaming guideline. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming. > 2FReplacing_Existing_Packages > Well, as far as I can tell, the package name, while weird, does comply with the guidelines. Having said that, you are right. superlu43 is certainly sufficient. I will change it. > -- > Please move 'make -C TESTING' into (new) %check. We do not want to build > tests with rpmbuild --nocheck . > Fair enough. done. Just to be sure, there IS a %check section. > Why is there no license text file with %license ? Please poke upstream to > clear what BSD version we have here. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#Good_Licenses > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/ > LicensingGuidelines#License_Text > License text is there! %doc README contains the license text AND other stuff. Perhaps I can add a license text .. perhaps I can move this file to %license .. > Last, a general advice to generally use macros where possible. > - URL: http://crd-legacy.lbl.gov/~xiaoye/SuperLU/ > - Source0: > http://crd-legacy.lbl.gov/~xiaoye/SuperLU/%{archname}_%{version}.tar.gz > URL: http://crd-legacy.lbl.gov/~xiaoye/%{pkgname} > Source0: %{url}/%{archname}_%{version}.tar.gz I missed that. I was changing macros a few times when I made this spec file that I missed this one. Will fix it. -- 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