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: malaga - Programming language for modelling of language-dependent grammatical information https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=346121 mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-10-24 14:44 EST ------- Some random comments (I just glanced at your spec file, I have not even tried to rebuild this) - Requires between subpackages from one srpm must usually be version-release specific. i.e. Requires: lib%{name} = %{version}-%{release}, for example - debuginfo must not be empty. - For -devel package, -devel package requires %{name} and %{name} requires lib%{name}. So "Requires: lib%{name}" is not needed for -devel package. - install-info must be called on %post. * Makefile is used only at build time and has no relation with the rebuilt binary rpms - Please don't write empty scriptlet entry (why is %postun line needed?) - Please check if "INSTALL.txt" is really needed. This type of files are usually needed for people who want to rebuild/install packages by themselves and are not needed for people who will install packages using rpm system. - main package depends on lib%{name} package. So if only lib%{name} package is installed and main package is not installed, no documents are installed. i.e. all documents should be moved to lib%{name} package. - The directory %{_datadir}/%{name} is not owned by any package. - Please remove static archive. (In reply to comment #0) > malaga: E: postin-without-install-info /usr/share/info/malaga.info.gz. This is probably caused by the fact that the upstream Makefile installs the info file, so I don't call install-info in the spec file. Should I? > > malaga: W: empty-%postun. Is this caused by the issue above? Please see above > > malaga-devel and libmalaga: W: no-documentation. All the documentation is in the main malaga package, is that OK? For %{name}-devel package, no documentation warning is okay, however as said above, all listed documents should be moved into lib%{name} package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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