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: httrack - Website copier and offline browser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=366121 mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-11-10 09:39 EST ------- Well, * About dangling-relative-symlink: - Well, this "dangling-relative-symlink" warnings themselves can be ignored when you check "installed" rpms by rpmlint like $ rpmlint httrack httrack-devel. However, for this package some points need considering. Actually why do the symlinks under %_libdir/httrack needed for -devel package? The "real" binaries which these symlinks point to are not under ldconfig search path so no external libraries or binaries can be linked against these binaries. For me the files under %_libdir/httrack are modules loaded by httrack binaries only and all symlinks under %_libdir/httrack and included in -devel package are not needed. * openssl header used? - From %_includedir/httrack/htsbasenet.h ----------------------------------------------------- 77 /* 78 #include <openssl/ssl.h> 79 #include <openssl/crypto.h> 80 #include <openssl/err.h> 81 */ ----------------------------------------------------- All in comments!! By the way.. * undefined-non-weak-symbol - $ rpmlint httrack shows ----------------------------------------------------- httrack.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libhtsjava.so.2.0.41 hts_malloc httrack.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libhtsjava.so.2.0.41 get_ext httrack.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libhtsjava.so.2.0.41 fconv httrack.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libhtsjava.so.2.0.41 get_httptype httrack.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libhtsjava.so.2.0.41 is_dyntype ----------------------------------------------------- And there is a symlink "libhtsjava.so" which points to libhtsjava.so.2.0.41 - If libhtsjava.so is supposed to be able to be linked from external libraries/binaries, then these undefined non-weak symbols should be fixed because these symbols canse linkage failure. It seems all these symbols are provided from libhttrack.so, so making htsjava.so link against libhttrack.so should fix this issue. * generic header file name and generic macro name in header file. - Header files with generic header names like "config.h" and generic macros like HAVE_STDLIB_H or so is very troublesome. Please see the explanation by Hans in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=232342 or https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=208034#c43 and - Remove config.h or at lease rename config.h - config.h is used in htsglobal.h and some generic macro names are used. Modify the macro names to avoid name space conflict. * Dependency for firefox or so - %{_bindir}/webhttrack seems to require some browser so this package should require some browser. - If possible, change the script so that webhttrack uses xdg-open first and make this package require "xdg-utils". * File entry - By the way, the file entries ----------------------------------------------------------------- %files %dir %{_datadir}/%{name} %{_datadir}/%{name}/* ----------------------------------------------------------------- can be replaced by ----------------------------------------------------------------- %files %{_datadir}/%{name}/ ----------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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