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: libsvm - A Library for Support Vector Machines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=254091 bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Version|devel |rawhide bugs.michael@xxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bugs.michael@xxxxxxx Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords| |Reopened Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | ------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael@xxxxxxx 2007-12-01 17:34 EST ------- This one is mispackaged. 1) Note that %{_datadir}/libsvm/ is not included. 2) Note that %{_libdir}/java/libsvm/ is not included. 3) Note how %_libdir/libsvm/ is included in the -devel package, while the two DSO files within it are also included in the main package. %files [...] %{_libdir}/libsvm/libsvm.so %{_libdir}/libsvm/libsvm.so.2.84 %files devel [...] %{_libdir}/libsvm 4) Drop "Requires: glibc". 5) Drop "Requires: python ...", because rpmbuild adds the python(abi) requirement automatically. 6) What is /usr/share/libsvm/src in the -devel package? 7) Creation of the DSO with non-versioned SONAME libsvm.so but also a versioned library outside run-time linker's search path is questionable. Where is this customisation explained? 8) What in the "libsvm-devel" package "Requires: libsvm"? -- 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