https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1955394 zm627 <zheng.ma@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(zheng.ma@xxxxxxxx | |m) | --- Comment #22 from zm627 <zheng.ma@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #21) Hi Ben, Thanks a lot for your review!! > ===== Issues ===== > > - There are some issues around interdependencies among subpackages and > license > files related to the new -libs subpackage. > * The -devel package correctly has > > Requires: %{name}-libs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} > > and correctly does not have its own copy of the LICENSE file (since the > -libs dependency will always provide a copy). However, I think > > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} > > is bogus and should be removed, unless I’m missing some reason that the > command-line tool and its man page should be required for compiling > applications that link against the library. The command line tool is not required for compiling apps that link against the library. So this "Requires" is removed. > - ExcludeArch is basically correctly handled. > > Instead of “Placeholder comment,” you should really have something similar > to > what you would put in the Bugzilla report. Something like “The purpose of > the > package is to support hardware that only exists on x86_64 platforms” would > be > fine. > > Would > > ExcludeArch: %{arm} aarch64 %{power64} s390x i686 > > be more accurately written as an ExclusiveArch? > > ExclusiveArch: x86_64 Replaced ExcludeArch with ExclusiveArch. > (You would still handle it the same way as the ExcludeArch in terms of > filing > an issue for unsupported architectures.) > - The latest changelog entry’s version, 1.0.4-1, does not match the package > version 1.0.5-1. Changed the changelog. Since the spec is not included, I replaced the only line in changelog with the 1.0.5 one. > - The PDF documentation does not belong in /usr/share/man. That is only for > actual man pages. Please put it in %{_pkgdocdir} instead. > > Since the existing configure/Makefile always installs the man pages and PDF > documentation in the same place, you will have to clean up after it. See > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_documentation > for > different methods of installing documentation. > > One reasonable approach would be to add > > rm -vf %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/*.pdf > > after “%make_install”, and then change > > %doc %{_mandir}/QATzip-man.pdf > > to > > %doc docs/QATzip-man.pdf > > in “%files devel”. That will install it as > /usr/share/doc/qatzip-devel/QATzip-man.pdf. Move the pdf out of the man directory to package doc directory with the commands you suggested. Thanks! > ===== Notes (no change required) ===== > > - You could, if you liked, write > > URL: https://github.com/intel/%{githubname} > Source0: > https://github.com/intel/%{githubname}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}- > %{version}.tar.gz > > more concisely as > > URL: https://github.com/intel/%{githubname} > Source0: %{url}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz > I changed to this format as it does look more concise :) Latest build: SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/zm627/qatzip/fedora-34-x86_64/02329873-qatzip/qatzip.spec SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/zm627/qatzip/fedora-34-x86_64/02329873-qatzip/qatzip-1.0.5-1.fc34.src.rpm And I have some questions here: 1. Is there any mapping of versions between Fedora and Redhat? For example the fc33 -> rehl 8.0 ? Our team is preparing to make it included in Redhat 9.0 , so I'd like to ask which version of Fedora should this rpm package be included. Thanks again for your review, Ben! Zheng -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
