https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1318988 --- Comment #21 from jiri vanek <jvanek@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Spec URL: https://jvanek.fedorapeople.org/java-1.8.0-openjdk-aarch32-jit/4/java-1.8.0-openjdk-aarch32.spec SRPM URL: https://jvanek.fedorapeople.org/java-1.8.0-openjdk-aarch32-jit/4/java-1.8.0-openjdk-aarch32-1.8.0.76-1.b00.fc24.src.rpm Description: A preview release of the upstream OpenJDK AArch32 porting project. In time it will be merged with the main java-1.8.0-openjdk package. Fedora Account System Username: jvanek https://jvanek.fedorapeople.org/java-1.8.0-openjdk-aarch32-jit/init4.patch scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13659515 I hope i fixed most of the issues you mentioned: - source is now based on upstream tag - zero is no longer build - specfile renamed - summary shortened. Sorry to say it, but i insists on shared prefix with main jdk. Fixed and need to go to main jdks: - license macro used properly now. - invalid license fixed Kept - upstream url - it is valid url. It i sparent of all projects on openjdk.java.net. I consider it as better source of information then direct project. Also it would be lost during first sync - patches commented out reduced by updating to latest upstream tag. I have no intentions to remove commented patches, as my intention is to keep pathces aligned with regular rpms. Any removing wil just increase maintenance cost. - same with provides - systemtap have no real upstream (imho) and the tutorial how to built it is in generate_tarballs.sh which is in repo - pkg is now based on u77, so the priority will jump for you again. But once the CPU update is done next week, mainjdk will be main again. And tbh:) I would liek to prefer this jdk when both are installed :) - yes, bundled lcms is workaround -- 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx