[Bug 1165] Review request: cc65 - Crosscompiler/Crossassembler for 6502 systems

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1165 Dan Horák <dan(a)danny.cz&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dan(a)danny.cz --- Comment #3 from Dan Horák <dan(a)danny.cz&gt; 2010-04-17 17:23:36 --- first do s/complaint/compliant/ :-) I'm not actively working on it, I did the 2.12.0 a year ago and if I remember correctly the update to 2.13.0 would need also to port the makefile patch. The license - almost all files are licensed under zlib with only 2 files having the original license that's considered non-free by Fedora (and thus it can't go directly to Fedora). I think the details could be found either in bugzilla.redhat.com or in the archives of fedora-legal mailing list. But the Fedora packaging guidelines (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines) apply also to packages in RPM Fusion. The date of http://fedora.danny.cz/cc65-2.13.0.spec is the date of upload, I last touched it half a year ago. It's meant primarily as an inspiration, but in my opinion it could be acceptable for RPM Fusion. The problems I see in the upstream spec file are - the name/version %defines are redundant - explicit usage of %attr - using absolute paths instead of macros - the target headers/libs should (IMHO) go into %{_datadir} (instead of %{_libdir}) because the content is not arch dependent from the host's view - the binaries are stripped and the -debuginfo subpackage is then useless -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.