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=226210 --- Comment #9 from Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-16 13:51:54 EDT --- > * rpmlint complains: > opal.src:27: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes openh323-devel > Will this cause any problem in the future? I would say, let's put a version > number just to be safe > opal-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation > At least the license file can get into this. > opal-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided openh323-devel > Is openh323 compatible with opal? If yes, you should provide it. I'll remove it as its long obsolete. > * Remove the precompiled binaries during prep. So far I found: > ./configure.exe > ./samples/opalgw/messages.bin > ./plugins/LID/TigerJet/TjIpSys.dll > ./plugins/LID/CM_HID/CM_HID.dll > ./plugins/LID/VPB/libvpb.lib > ./plugins/video/H.263-ffmpeg/ffmpeg/libavcodec.dll > ./plugins/video/H.263-ffmpeg/ffmpeg/libavcodec.so > ./src/win32/vpbapi.lib: current ar archive > Actually the ffmpeg stuff is patent encumbered. You should take that stuff off > and provide a "clean" tarball for the SRPM. I'll speak to upstream to get this cleaned up. > * Please package the docs directory. I think it makes more sense to put it in > the -devel package. OK > * Shall we package samples and plugins (possibly in different subpackages)? > Note that some plugins have different licenses. The library is little use with out plugins so I don't see the point in splitting it up. > * We prefer %defattr(-,root,root,-) > > * Please make use of the %{name} macro. > > * The devel package must require openssl-devel (see iax2/remote.h) Will fix > * Weird provides: > $ rpm -qv --provides opal > ()(64bit) <--- This one > g726()(64bit > ... See RHBZ 473084 > * Most libraries install into the directory %{_libdir}/%{name} , but not > %{_libdir}/%{name}-%{version}. Any reason you picked the latter way? As per upstream. > * Latest version is not packaged. opal-3.4.3 is available Yes, but the current ekiga release depends on 3.4.2. When the new version of ekiga comes out it will be upgraded too. > * Fedora specific flag -O2 is overriden at certain instances by -Os. That needs > fixed. I'll add it to my upstream list. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review