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: bind-libbind - The Berkeley Internet Name Domain (BIND) libbind resolver libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442009 ------- Additional Comments From fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-04-20 07:56 EST ------- Looks good, just some IMHO odd things I'd like to mention/discuss before we move on: * Quoting from the initial comment in this bug: >I choosed the libbind version from RHEL 5 to have a long update support >and maybe some help from Adam Tkac, if needed. As per his suggestion, it >is better to put this in EPEL 4, as RHEL 4 only should get bug fixes and >no enhancements. Well, if this is for EPEL4 why didn't you use the bind from RHEL4 as base, as it has "long update support" as well? I tend to say it will looks quite odd for users to find bind-9.2.4 in RHEL4 but a libbind that's based on the RHEL5-version bind-9.3.5 in EPEL4. Are they really independent/will libbind from bind-9.3 work fine with bind-9.2? * Minor: Might be wise to add a version number or something to this (but okay, maybe none is used in the bind package from RHEL5, so feel free to ignore it) : Source1: libbind-man.tar.gz * Specifying glibc-devel should not be needed, as gcc likely depends on it: BuildRequires: glibc-devel >= 2.2.5-26, glibc-kernheaders >= 2.4-7.10 * The "description" is IMHO confusing/hard to read and doesn't really express what the package contains. * This "(-,root,root)" IIRC should be "(-,root,root,-)" * rpmlint silent -- 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