Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ustr - String library, very low memory overhead, simple to import https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=248231 ------- Additional Comments From james.antill@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-07-27 13:53 EST ------- (Assuming that you are the upstream of this package and you have not yet released 1.0.1 formally) Yes. * For /sbin/ldconfig, usually we don't write Requires(post) and so on. Why? What is best practice, no deps. or just a normal requires? * rpm (sub)packages which contains pkgconfig .pc files should have "Requires: pkgconfig" This is true even if it's not required. From the upstream POV it isn't required, it can be used if you find pkg-config easier to use ... or you can just do -lustr etc. Obviously I can add it to the rpm anyway, if you want though. * mock build log says that fedora specific compilation flags are not honored. Ok, I thought: CFLAGS="${CFLAGS:-%optflags}" ; export CFLAGS ; ...was enough, as that's what the %configure macro seems to be using. I can't find any documentation on what I should be calling here (there is no ./configure). * The following directories are not owned by any packages. ------------------------------------------------------ %{_datadir}/ustr-%{version}/ %{_datadir}/doc/ustr-devel-%{version}/ ------------------------------------------------------ My bad, I assumed dir/* got dir too. * Usually the dependency for other subpackages must be version-release specific. i.e. -devel package should have Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}, for example Fixed. * Use %_includedir for /usr/include. In the %files section? Fixed. * I have not installed ustr yet, however would you check the dependencies between subpackages? For example, why does -debug subpackage require -static subpackage? (well, this is a question) I can't remember :(. I've changed debug to just depend on devel, and debug-static to depend on debug. * For summary (In reply to comment #2) > * summary seems all the same for all packages?? > This is common for libraries, no? For instance glib2 and glib2-devel > have the same summary but different descriptions ... Strange... Anyway as you can try "rpmdev-newspec libfoo" to create skeleton spec file, usually summary and description for -devel subpackage are like: Summary: Development files for %{name} Ok, I guess the other stuff just hasn't been fixed yet. Fixed. * And please increase release number (Perhaps you want to set release number as 1 when review is done and wants to set release number 0 during review, but please don't. At least please increase release number as 0.1, 0.2, ...) Yeh, I didn't want rel=1 until it's 1.0.1 is released upstream, I'll upload a 0.2 version as soon as I can find out what to do about: requires for pkg-config requires for ldconfig CFLAGS -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review