Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=246525 --- Comment #20 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-09-16 11:24:30 EDT --- >- The name is changed from libMini to mini to reflect Fedora packaging guidelines Which packaging guideline are you refering to ? At least Fedora guideline say that the package name is the name of the source tarball (case sensitive). Thus the name defined in the configure.ac as the package name in the autotools case. But others distribution guideline seems to requires package designed to provide a library (mainly) to have lib as a name prefix(ie Debian). Thus using libMini was a good thing (it help to see what is the purpose and the way it needs to be packaged as). Now if the program is designed to run on mingw or other, maybe it can be named libmini (case insensitive). DXT code... OKay Build Requested to Rawhide: success http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=828135 Local test on Fedora 8 x86_64. rpmlint on installed package (see attached) undefined-non-weak-symbol should be fixed at build time (missing -llibrary flag at linking time). unused-direct-shlib-dependency can be fixed using : (between %configure and make within the spec file) # clean unused-direct-shlib-dependencies sed -i -e 's! -shared ! -Wl,--as-needed\0!g' libtool pkgconfig support in Mini.pc seems fine but gl.pc and glu.pc doesn't exist in F-8 so pkg-config will fails and you will need a workaround. I just wonder if some of theses shouldn't be moved to Libs.private instead ? Then package requirement for -devel should be tweaked. At least libGL, libGLU and libcurl seems required since they are exposed via the API. Not sure if others are relevant. I don't see the aim of doing Cflags: -DNOSQUISH in Mini.pc since this is not used within the API Please use libGL-devel and libGLU-devel instead of mesa-libGL-devel and mesa-libGLU-devel. The Virtual Provides will pick the appropriate version. This is minor for this version, but according to the Mini.pc, the version is 8.8.8. This needs to be set within the rpm package using pre-versioning scheme. (where the release tag is <1). About pre-version, i'm not against, if it is stable enought so we can start working on dependencies within Rawhide... Keep up the good work... -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review