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=459637 --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-02 19:43:10 EDT --- The shared-lib-calls-exit bits are just pointing out an oddity in the API of the library; generally the caller would want to handle errors itself instead of simply having the library exit, but I suspect that most of these libraries are for internal use anyway. If anything, they'd be something to report upstream; they're not blockers. The unused-direct-shlib-dependency complaints are valid, but not really significant. I don't see any libraries there that wouldn't be pulled in by qt itself, so there's not really any inefficiency. The static libraries will need to go in their own -static packages; they are not permitted in the -devel packages alongside shared libraries. Preferably they aren't included at all, but that's up to you. Many (all?) of the *so files are duplicated between the base and -devel packages. It looks like you used the usual pattern for capturing just the versioned .so files, but this package uses some odd library versioning so for some reason the library version appears before the ".so" as well as after it on some files. I don't pretend to understand why, but I guess you'll need to change the patterns used for capturing the versioned and unversioned .so files. The COPYRIGHT file mentions a gsm directory with a different copyright, but I don't see it in the package. I guess the package now just uses an external library. I don't see any licensing information on the sounds. Can you verify the license? -- 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