https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1474033 --- Comment #20 from Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Andrey Maslennikov from comment #18) > Supporting several specs is more complicated especially taking into account > that the diff will be in 1-2 lines only. > So I'd like to keep it this way, the line is required. It was proved by some > fails in our build env :) Of course if the build test was performed on a system with RPM < 4.6, then without explicit BuildRoot and Group tags it would fail. It's just that usually in Fedora spec files we do not care about such systems. I'm not going to block the review for this, so keep the tags if you want them. > Will add a comment. In fact, static libs are simply required to develop with > UCX. Do you mean it is impossible to develop with dynamic libraries? Where is the problem? I am looking at the contents of the ucx and ucx-devel binary packages. The contents of the /usr/share/ucx directory look like documentation to me. Would you consider moving those files under /usr/share/doc/ucx? (That would be an upstream change, not just a packaging change.) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
