https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1315801 --- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> --- > > * Bundled library > > - It seems that this package bundles libev. Is there any chance to use the > > system version of libev instead [1]? Or in the worst case provide the > > "bundled" virtual provide. > > I tried to separate bundled libev and using system libev (libev-devel). And > I suceeded to compile the nio4r with system libev, and to pass almost all > the rspec test cases. > But when I compared the bundled libev (version 4.22) and original source > [1], I found that the bundled libev had individually modified. [2][3] > > So, finally I made a choice to use "bundled(<libname>) = <version>". Once this gets into Fedora, could you please mention this virtual provide here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries_Virtual_Provides Seems there was some changes in this policy like 6 weeks ago. Also a few more nits: * Please bump the release - It is good habit to bump the release every iteration, update %changelog as well as provide updated SRPM. That way, I can always check the progress since last time.(In reply to Jun Aruga from comment #3) * Better inline comments - I would suggest to replace your comment: # Fix the issue for rpmlint # I reported it to upstream, and its fix was merged to master branch. # https://github.com/celluloid/nio4r/pull/86 by something more explanatory, e.g.: # Remove useless shebang. # https://github.com/celluloid/nio4r/pull/86 I don't think that reference to rpmlint is useful there. - This note applies generally, also to other similar comments ;) * License - Due to bundled libev, I think the license field should be updated. The libev license appears to be (BSD or GPLv2+) while the code of the rest of the package is MIT, the license tag should be: MIT and (BSD or GPLv2+) -- 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx