https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1361340 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- Why don't you just build from the github tarball? That's simpler than mucking around with pypi and a separate license file [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#Git_Tags]. It isn't strictly required, but it's considered good practice to specify more specific patterns in %files: %{python2_sitearch}/%{srcname}/ %{python2_sitearch}/%{srcname}-egg.info... I would be much much better to not install a private module in the top level python namespace: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/_fadvise.so should become /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/fadvise/_fadvise.so. Of course this is an upstream issue, but maybe you could try to work with them to fix this. Actually patching this is trivial: 1. move the .so file 2. change from _fadvise import ... → from ._fadvise import ... There is no man page, and pyadvise --help isn't exactly verbose. It would be nice to extend the description in --help. -- 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