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 #5 from Lucian Langa <cooly@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-03 05:34:51 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > 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. Removed. > 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. Fixed (I think...) > 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've asked upstream to update the file. > I don't see any licensing information on the sounds. Can you verify the > license? Asked upstream. new version: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/svxlink.spec http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/svxlink-080730-4.fc10.src.rpm -- 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